^ 



11 



s 



u 



U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 

BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY— BULLETIN NO. 78. 



B, T. GALLOWAY, CMtfqf Bureau. 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



T. L. LYON, 

Agriculturist and Associate Director of the Agricultural 

Experiment Station of Nebraska, and 

Collaborator of the Bureau ov Plant Industry. 



VEGETABLE PATHOLOGICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL 
INVESTIGATIONS, 

IN COOPERATION WITH THE 

AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STA1 ;ON OF NEBRASKA. 



Issued October 24, 1905. 




WASHINGTON: 
government printing OFFICE, 
1 9 Q 5 . 




Glass __ 
Book_ 



Lf 



'3* 



U. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 

'i 

BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY— BULLETIN NO. 78. 

B. T. GALLOWAY. Chief of Bureau. 



J-3 J 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



T. L. LYON, 

Agriculturist and Associate Director of the Agricultural 

Experiment Station of Nebraska, and 

Collaborator of the Bureau of Plant Industry. 



VEGETABLE PATHOLOGICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL 
INVESTIGATIONS. 

IN COOPERATION WITH THE 

AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION OF NEBRASKA. 



Issied October 24, 1905. 




WASHINGTON: 
government printing office. 
19 05. j 



BUREAU OF PLANT INDUSTRY. 

B. T. GALLOWAY, 

Pathologist and Physiologist, and Chief of Bureau. 

VEGETABLE PATHOLOGICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS. 

Albert F. Woods, Pathologist and Physiologist in Charge, Acting Chief of Bureau in Absence of Chief. 

BOTANICAL INVESTIGATIONS AND EXPERIMENTS. 

Frederick V. Coville, Botanist in Charge. 

GRASS AND FORAGE PLANT INVESTIGATIONS. 

W. J. Spillman, Agriculturist in Charge. 

POMOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS. 

G. B. Brackett. Pomologist in Charge. 

SEED AND PLANT INTRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION. 

A. J. Pieters, Botanist in Charge. 

ARLINGTON EXPERIMENTAL FARM. 

L. C. Corbett, Horticulturist in Charge. 

EXPERIMENTAL GARDENS AND GROUNDS. 

E. M. Byrnes, Superintendent. 

32) \°1 \ 

J. E. Rockwell, Editor. 
James E. Jones, Chief Clerk. 



VEGETABLE PATHOLOGICAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS. 

SCIENTIFIC STAFF. 

Albert F. Woods, Pathologist and Physiologist in Charge. 

Erwin F. Smith, Pathologist in Charge of Laboratory of Plant Pathology. 

Herbert J. Webber, Physiologist in Charge of Laboratory of Plant Breeding. 

Walter T. Swingle, Physiologist in Charge of Laboratory of Plant Life History. 

Newton B. Pierce, Pathologist in Charge of Pacific Coast Laboratory. 

M. B. Waite, Pathologist in Charge of Investigations of Diseases of Orchard Fruits. 

Mark Alfred Cakleton, Cereatistm Charge of Cereal Investigations. 

Hermann von Schkenk, wi Charge of Mississippi \' alley Laboratory. 

P. H. Rolfs, Pathologist in Charge of Subtropical Laboratory. 

C. O. Townsend, Pathologist in Charge of Sugar Beet Investigations. 

P. II. Dorsett," Pathologist. 

T. H. Kearney, Physiologist. Plant Breeding. 

Cornelius L. Shear, Pathologist. 

William A. Orton, Pathologist. 

W. M. Scott, Pathologist 

Joseph S. Chamberlain, b Physiological Chemist. Cereal Investigations. 

Ernst A. Bessey, Pathologist. 

Flora W. Patterson, Mycologist. 

Charles P. Hartley - , Assistant in Physiology, Plant Breeding. 

Karl F. Kellermax, Assistant in Physiology. 

Deane B. Swingle, Assistant in Pathology.' 

Jesse B. Norton, Assistant in Physiology. Plant Breeding. 

James B. Rorer, Assistant in Pathology. 

Lloyd S. Tenny. Assistant in Pathology. 

George G. Hedgcoi k. Assistant in Pathology. 

Perley Spaulding, Scientific Assistant 

P. J. O'Gara. 8ci< ntific Assistant, Plant Pathology. 

A. D. Shamel, Scientific Assistant. Plant Breeding. 

T. Ralph Robinson, Assistant in Physiology. 

Florence Hedges, Scientific Assistant, Bacteriology. 

Charles J. Brand, Assistant in Physiology. Plant Life History. 

Henry A. Miller, Scientific Assistant, Cereal Investigations. 

Ernest B. Brown. Scit ntific Assistant, Plant Breeding. 

Leslie A. Fitz, Scientific Assistant, Cereal Investigations. 

I i'n\ uiB I. II IR/BBR, Scientific Assistant. Plant Breeding. 

i'ii i Merwin, Scimt'fic'A ssistant. 

\V 'A' C (BEY, Tobacco- I' 

»<>iin \ax LeenhCW, Jr.*, Expert 

J Arthur Le Clerc,>; Physiological Chemist, Cereal Investigations. 

T I' Hi i kwitii. ExpcrJ r Plant Physiology. 

a DefatleTj to Seed and Plant Introduction and Distribution. 
6 Detailed to Bureau of Chemistry. 
c Detailed from Bureau of Chemistry. 



JAN 8 1907 
0. of 0. 



LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. 



U. S. Department of Agriculture, 

Bureau of Plant Industry, 

Office of the Chief, 
Washington, I). ('., April 15, 1905. 
Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith the manuscript of- a 
technical paper entitled "Improving the Quality of Wheat," pre- 
pared by Dr. T. L. Lyon, Agriculturist of the Agricultural Experi- 
ment Station of Nebraska, who, as a collaborator of this Bureau, is in 
charge of the cooperative breeding experiments conducted by the 
Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station and the Department of 
Agriculture, and I recommend its publication as Bulletin No. 78 of 
the series of this Bureau. 

Respectfully, B. T. Galloway, 

( Trief of Bureau. 
Hon. James Wilson, 

Secretary of Agriculture. 

3 



PREFACE. 



The following technical paper on "Improving the Quality of 
Wheat," Irr Dr. T. L. Lyon, of the Agricultural Experiment Sta- 
tion of Nebraska, embodies the results of extended investigations on 
the application of chemical methods to the selection and improve- 
ment of wheat. The investigations were carried on mainly at the 
Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station in connection with the 
cooperative work of that institution and the Plant-Breeding Labora- 
tory of this Office. 

In the breeding of wheat more extended data are greatly desired 
so that more intelligent methods of selection may be devised. The 
investigations of Doctor Lyon, it is believed, have established 
methods which will be of great value to wheat breeders and mate- 
rially facilitate the work in their field. 

Tins paper was originally presented as a thesis to the faculty of 
Cornell University for the degree of doctor of philosophy. The 
author wishes to express his appreciation of the guidance of Prof. 
I. P. Roberts, Prof. G. C. Caldwell, and Prof. Thos, F. Hunt, who 
constituted the committee having his work in charge, also of the 
assistance of Prof. L. H. Bailey and Mr. G. N. Lauman, with whom 
he frequently sought counsel. For the analytical work, extending 
through a period of seven years and involving several thousand 
chemical determinations, he is indebted to Prof. S. Avery, Mr. R. S. 
Hiltner, Prof. R. W. Thatcher, Mr. Y. Nikaido, Miss Rachael Corr, 
Mr. H. B. Slade, and Mr. G. H. Walker. Mr. Alvin Keyser has 
kept the records of wheat-breeding plats and Mr. E. G. Montgomery 
has assisted in keeping other records. 

A. F. Woods, 
Pathologist and Physiologist. 

Office of Vegetable Pathological 

and Physiological Investigations, 

Washington, D. C, March 31, 1905. 

5 



I NTRODUCTORY STATEM ENT. 



While the art of plant breeding has been practiced for nearly a 
century, the last decade has witnessed a marvelous awakening of 
interest in the subject, both from a scientific and practical stand- 
point. The keen competition in crop production and the resulting 
cheaper prices, the great and varying demands of modern trade con- 
ditions, etc., render it necessary that the modern plant breeder have 
the most thorough knowledge possible of the plant which he is striv- 
ing to improve. Not only must we secure varieties and races differ- 
ing in external characters and yielding more heavily under a certain 
set of conditions, but we must also examine the chemical constit- 
uents of the product and strive to change and improve them in order 
that they may better fit our purpose. 

The great achievements of plant breeding in the past have been 
mainly in physical characters, requiring only superficial knowledge 
and gross examination for recognition. Many of the improvements 
now demanded, however, require the most careful chemical exami- 
nation of the product and the devising of careful means and methods 
of selection based on the knowledge thus obtained. 

The first and still the most noteworthy achievement of this nature 
is the increase of the sugar content in the sugar beet. When the 
work on this subject was first started by Louis Vilmorin, the mother 
beets, which were supposed to contain the most sugar, were separated 
by their greater density, this being determined by throwing the beets 
into a solution of brine of such density that the greater number of them 
would float. The few heavier ones which were found to sink were 
retained as mothers and planted to raise seed. Later the methods 
were improved, and finally the percentage of sugar content in the 
different individual beets was determined by actual chemical analy- 
sis. This careful method of selection has been in operation for more 
than fort}^ years, and has resulted in greatly increasing the sugar 
content in the beets, and has rendered their cultivation profitable 
where otherwise the industry would have failed. 

The second most noteworthy case of increasing certain chemical 
constituents in a plant by careful breeding is that furnished by the 
investigations of the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station in 
increasing the nitrogen, oil, and starch content in corn. These note- 
worthy experiments carried out by Doctor Hopkins and his assist- 
ants have greatly stimulated breeding work of this nature, and have 
paved the way for further research of a similar kind. 

In wheat it is particularly necessary that a thorough knowledge 
be" obtained of the variations in the chemical constituents and their 
relation to the other characters of the plant, such as yield, size of 



O INTRODUCTORY STAT? ME XT. 

kernel, size of head, season of maturity, etc. Doctor Lyon's exten- 
sive researches will thus be found very valuable in enabling us to 
understand more clearly these complex relations and in pointing out 
the main factors to be considered in breeding wheats to increase the 
gliadin and glutenin content, and still obtain increased yield and 
better bread-making qualities. 

The gross selection of wheat seed heretofore has largely been based 
on the separation of large and heavy kernels. Doctor Lyon's re- 
searches have demonstrated that the smaller and lighter kernels 
contain the largest percentage of nitrogen, and that while the. yield 
from kernels of this kind at first gives a smaller yield of grain, the 
total yield per acre of nitrogen is nevertheless greater. B3- con- 
tinuous selection of the smaller and lighter kernels for several gen- 
erations he shows that the grain yield gradually increases and finally 
approaches or equals the yield derived from the select large and 
heavy kernels. This gives us a new view of the process of wheat 
selection necessary to increase the nitrogen yield per acre. 

The very numerous chemical analyses made by Doctor Lyon give 
an indication of the great variation of the percentage of proteid 
nitrogen present in different plants. In the analyses of samples in 
1902 the plants varied from 2.02 per cent to 4 per cent, while in the 
analyses of the next year a variation from 1.20 per cent to 5.85 per 
cent was found. The existence of this wide variation affords abund- 
ant opportunity for improvement by selection. 

Evidence is also given which shows conclusively that the average 
composition of a spike of wheat may be judged from the analyses 
of a row of its spikelets. A satisfactory method of conducting selec- 
tions has thus been devised. 

The results also show that early-maturing plants give much the 
largest average yield, which is a most important point in guiding 
selection to increase the yield. The percentage of proteid nitrogen 
is rather less in the early plants, but the total nitrogen per plant is 
probably greater. 

The quality of the gluten largely determines the bread-making 
value of a variety of wheat, and it is thus important to keep the 
ratio of the two elements constituting the gluten — the gliadin and 
glutenin — the same. Doctor Lyon has shown that as the gluten 
content is increased by selection the ratio of gliadin to glutenin 
remains about the same, so that the value of the wheat for bread- 
making purposes is not impaired. 

The extensive data presented in this bulletin bearing on important 
matters relating to the improvement of wheat hy breeding will 
enable wheat breeders to plan and conduct their operations with a 
degree of certainty which would otherwise not be possible. 

Herbert J. Webber, 
Physiologist in Chargt of Laboratory of Plant Breeding. 

Washington, D. C March 30, 1905. 



CONTENTS 



Page. 

Object of the investigation 13 

Part I. — Historical: 

Some conditions affecting the composition and yield of wheat 17 

Composition as affected by time of cutting 17 

Influence of immature seed upon yield 20 

Influence of climate upon composition and yield 20 

Influence of soil upon composition and yield 23 

Influence of soil moisture upon composition and yield 29 

Influence of size or weight of t he seed-wheat kernel upon the crop yield.. . 30 

Relation of size of kernel to nitrogen content 35 

Influence of the specific gravity of the seed kernel upon yield 37 

Relation of specific gravity of kernel to nitrogen content 39 

Conditions affecting the production of nitrogen in the grain 40 

Part II. — Experimental: 

Some properties of the wheat kernel. 49 

Yield of nitrogen per acre 72 

Method for selection to increase the quantity of proteids in the kernel 76 

A basis for selection to increase the quantity of proteids in the endosperm of 

the kernel 84 

Improvement in the quality of the gluten 91 

Some results of bleeding to increase the content of proteid nitrogen 95 

Yield of g. ain as affected by susceptibility to cold 100 

Yield and nitrogen content of grain as affected by length of growing period. . 104 

Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant Ill 

Summary and conclusions 118 

9 



TABLES OF EXPERIMENTS. 

Page. 
Table 1. Analyses of kernels of high and of low specific gravity 49 

2. Proportion of light and of heavy seed 50 

3. Analyses of large, heavy kernels and of small, light kernels 50 

4. Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of 

kernels. Crop of 1902 52 

5. Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen 

content of kernels. Crop of 1902 56 

6. Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to specific 

gravities of kernels. Crop of 1902 56 

7. Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to weight of 

average kernel. Crop of 1902 57 

8. Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. 

Crop of 1903 59 

9. Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of pro- 

teid nitrogen. Crop of 1903 64 

10. Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average kernel. Crop 

of 1903 65 

11. Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average 

kernel! Crop of 1903 71 

12. Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to grams of proteid 

nitrogen in average kernel. Crop of 1903 72 

13. Crops grown from light and from heavy seed for four years 73 

14. Analyses of twenty-five spikes of wheat, showing their total organic nitro- 

gen 77 

15. Analyses of twenty-three spikes of wheat, showing their percentage of 

proteid nitrogen 77 

16. Analyses of twenty-one plants, showing total nitrogen and proteid nitro- 



gen. 



78 



17. Analyses of spikes of wheat, showing difference in proteid nitrogen 79 

18. Variations in content of proteids 80 

19. Relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitrogen 85 

20. Summary of analyses, showing relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen 

to proteid nitrogen 88 

21. Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen 88 

22. Summary of analyses, showing relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus- 

glutenin nitrogen 91 

23. Ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of their sum increases. 92 

24. Summary of analyses, showing the ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the con- 

tent of their sum increases 94 

25. Analyses showing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to 

another 96 

11 



12 TABLES OF EXPERIMENTS. 

Page. 
Table 20. Summary of analyses, showing transmission of nitrogen from one genera- 
tion tu another 98 

27. Analyses showing transmission of proteid nitrogen in average kernel . 99 

28. Analyses showing transmission of kernel weight 100 

29. Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family. . 101 

30. Summary of yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in 

each family 104 

31. Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of 

growing period 105 

32. Summary of yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according 

to length of growing period Ill 

33. Summary of nitrogen content, etc., tabulated according to yield per 

plant Ill 

34. Summary of yield, e-tc, tabulated according to nitrogen content Ill 

35. Relation of size of head to yield, height , and tillering of plant 112 

36. Summary i >f relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant . 118 
'AT. Relation of yield of plant to height and tillering, and to the yield per head . 118 
38. Relation of yield per head to yield, height, and tillering of plant, and to 

weight of average kernel 118 



B. P. I.— 158. V. P. P. I.— 133. 

IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



OBJECT OF THE INVESTIGATION. 

Efforts to improve the wheat plant have been numerous and have 
accomplished important results. The work of Fultz, Clawson, 
Rudy, Wellman, Powers, Hayne, Bolton, Cobb, Green, and Hays in 
improving by selection, and of Pringle, Blount, Schindel, Saunders, 
Farrar, Jones, Carleton, and Hays in improving by hybridization, 
has residted in giving this country many prolific strains and varieties 
of wheat, while Garton Brothers, of England, Farrar, of New South 
Wales, Vilmorin, of France, Rimpau, of Germany, and others have 
accomplished the same for other portions of the world. Attempts 
at improvement have, however, been directed primarily toward effect- 
ing an increase in the yield rather than in the quality of the crop. 
While the latter property has not been entirely lost sight of, selection 
based on quality has never been applied to the individual plant, but 
only to the progeny of otherwise desirable plants. 

Why selection for quality of grain in the individual plant has not 
gone hand in hand with selection for other desirable properties is 
perhaps to be explained by the fact that no method for such selection 
has ever been devised. Mr. W. Farrar, of Queanbeyen, New South 
Wales, in an address made a short time ago, said: 

Before we can make any considerable progress in improving the quality of the grain of 
the wheat plant we shall have to devise a method for making a fairly correct quantitative 
estimate of the constituents * * * of the grain of a single plant and yet have seeds 
left to propagate from that plant. 

In devising a method for increasing the percentage of nitrogen in 
wheat it becomes desirable to know the causes that produce variation 
in this constituent of the kernel. Numerous experiments and obser- 
vations have been made on this subject, the results of winch agree in 
the main in attributing such variation to the following conditions: 

(1) Stage of development of the kernel. 

(2) Variation in temperature of different regions. 

(3) Variation in temperature of different years in the same region. 

(4) Variation in the supply and form of soil nitrogen. 

(5) Variation in the supply of soil moisture. 

13 



14 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

All of these factors have been studied, and are recognized as opera- 
tive. Nothing, however, appears to have been done to show their 
influence upon the actual amount of nitrogen taken up by the wheat 
plant and deposited in the kernel. This is really the point of greatest 
interest; for although it is desirable to secure a wheat of greater nutri- 
tive value, it should not be done at the sacrifice of yield of nitrogenous 
.substance. 

Admitting that variation in the nitrogen content of wheat is 
induced by the conditions mentioned, it is essential to the plant 
breeder to know whether a high or low nitrogen content may be, 
under similar conditions, a characteristic of an individual plant; 
whether this quality is transmitted to the offspring; with what con- 
stant characteristics it is correlated, and whether a high percentage 
of nitrogen in a normal, perfectly matured wheat plant is an indica- 
tion of a large accumulation of nitrogen by that plant. 

The data contained in this paper cover the points mentioned, and 
it is hoped that some definite information has been gained that will 
lead to a practical solution of the problem of improving by breeding 
the quality of wheat for bread making. 



PABT I. 



HISTORICAL 



IS 



SOME CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE COMPOSI- 
TION AND YIELD OF WHEAT. 



Experiments to ascertain the effect of different conditions upon 
the composition and yield of wheat have been conducted mainly 
along the following lines: 

(1) Stage of growth at which the grain is harvested. 

(2) Influence of immature seed upon the resulting crop. 

(3) Effect of climate. 

(4) Effect of soil. 

(5) Effect of soil moisture. 

(6) Influence of size or weight of seed upon the resulting crop. 

(7) Influence of specific gravity of seed upon the resulting crop. 

A brief summary of a number of these experiments is herewith 
given. 

COMPOSITION AS AFFECTED BY TIME OF CUTTING. 

In 1879, a and again in 1892/' Dr. R. C. Kedzie conducted very 
careful experiments to note the chemical changes that occur in the 
wheat kernel during its formation and ripening. These agree in 
the main in showing a gradual decrease in the percentage of total 
nitrogen, albuminoid nitrogen, and non-albuminoid nitrogen from 
the time the grain set to the time the kernel was ripe. The decrease 
in all of these constituents was much more rapid during the first 
than during the last stages of this development. The percentage 
of ash decreased at the same time. 

In 1897 Prof, G. L. Teller'' carried on some experiments in which 
he covered the ground alread}^ gone over by Doctor Kedzie and 
also contributed to the knowledge of the subject some very important 
data concerning the proportion of the various proteids contained 
in the wheat kernel during the process of development. Teller 
found that the proportion of total nitrogen in the dry matter steadily 
decreased from the time the kernel was formed up to about a week 
before ripening, but that, unlike Doctor Kedzie's results, it gradually 
increased from that time on. He intimates that this increase before 
ripening may have been due to defective sampling and hoped to 

a Report of Michigan Board of Agriculture, 1881-82, pp. 233-239. 
& Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 101. 
''Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 53. 

27889— No. 78—05 2 17 



18 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



repeat the experiment to remedy this, but he has published nothing 
further. The amid nitrogen continued to decrease up to the time of 
ripening, as did also the ash, fats, fiber, dextrins, and pentosans. 
There was a gradual and marked increase in the proportion of gliadin 
up to the time of ripening, and a somewhat less and rather irregular 
decrease in the proportion of glutenin during the same period. 

Failyer and Willard " report analyses of wheat in the soft-dough 
stage and when ripe. The ash, crude fiber, fat, and the total and 
albuminoid nitrogen were higher in the soft-dough wheat, and the 
nitrogen-free extract and non-albuminoid nitrogen were higher in 
the ripe wheat. 

Dietrich and Konig b quote results from five experimenters — Reiset, 
Stockhardt, Heinrich, Nowacki, and Handtke. Only in one case 
(Heinrich) is there a constant decrease in total nitrogen as the grain 
approaches ripeness. There is much inconstancy in the results, there 
being in some cases a decrease in nitrogen between the milk stage 
and full ripeness and sometimes an increase. There is little informa- 
tion to be gained from the results quoted by Dietrich and Konig. 

Kornicke and Werner in their "Handbuch des Getreidebaues ,,c 
refer to the work of Stockhardt, and also that of Heinrich, to show 
that during the process of ripening the percentage of nitrogen in 
the wheat kernel gradually diminishes, as does also the percentage 
of ash, and that, on the other hand, the percentage of carbohydrates 
increases during the same period. Heinrich also shows by a state- 
ment of the number of grams of these constituents in 2,600 kernels 
at different stages of development that the absolute amount of 
nitrogen and ash increases up to the time of ripening, and that 
consequently the decrease in the percentage of these constituents 
is due to the rapid increase in the carbohydrates. The results 
obtained by Heinrich appear as follows when tabulated: 



Stage of growth. 



Starch. 



14 days after bloom 
Beginning to ripen. 

Ripe 

Overripe 



Percentage 
in 100 

parts of 
dry matter 

of kernel. 



61.44 
74.17 
75.66 

76.38 



Grams in 

2,600 
kernels. 



22.0 
58.5 
67.0 
70.0 



Percentage 
in 100 

parts of 
dry matter 

of kernel 



14.05 

12.21 
11.82 
11.67 



Grams in 

2,600 
kernels. 



5.0 
10.0 
10.5 
10.7 



Ash. 



Percentage 

in 100 Grams in 

parts of 2,600 

dry matter kernels. 

of kernel. 



2.48 
2.14 
1.97 

1.88 



0*84 
1.70 

1.75 
1.70 



Nedokutschajew'' analyzed wheat kernels at different stages of 
development and found an almost uniform decrease in the percentage 



a Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 32. 
l> Zusammensetzung u. Verdaulichkeit der Futtermittel, 1, p. 419. 
c Handbuch des Getreidebaues, Berlin, 1884, 2, pp. 474-476. 
rfLandw. Vers. Stat., 56 (1902), pp. 303-310. 



COMPOSITION AS AFFECTED BY TIME OF CUTTING. 



19 



of total nitrogen, a slight but irregular decrease in the percentage of 
proteid nitrogen in the dry matter, and a constant decrease in the 
percentage of amid nitrogen. He holds that the amid substances 
are converted into albumen as the kernels ripen. His figures are 
as follows : 



Date. 



Weight. 

of 
kernel 
(nig.). 



Percentage of- 



Julv 13.. 
July 18.. 
July 24.. 

July 29.. 
August 3 
August 9 



9.17 
15.80 

30. 79 

37. !t9 
46.39 
45.46 



Dry Total Proteid 

matter, nitrogen, nitrogen. 



30. 14 
37.23 
45.18 
38.37 
51.52 
49.83 



2.87 
2.55 
2.65 
2. 46 
2. 32 
2.37 



1.90 
1.94 
2. 33 



1.98 
2. 13 



Aspara- 

gin 
nitrogen. 



0.29 
.20 
.19 
.16 
.13 
.11 



Amid 
nitrogen. 



0.68 
.41 
.13 
.22 
.21 
.13 



Judging from these results there can be no doubt that the per- 
centage of nitrogen, both total and proteid, decreases as the kernel 
develops, owing to the more rapid deposition of starch that goes 
on during the later stages of growth. The larger part of the nitrogen 
used by the wheat plant appears to be absorbed during the early 
life of the plant. This is transferred in large amounts to the kernel 
in the early stages of its development, after which nitrogen accretion 
bj 7- the kernel is comparatively slight. The deposition of starch, 
on the other hand, continues actively during the entire development 
of the kernel. It would further appear that the amid nitrogen is 
converted into proteid compounds as development proceeds. 

As showing the stages of growth of the wheat plant at which the 
greatest absorption of nitrogen occurs, some experiments may be 
quoted. 

Lawes and Gilbert" say: 

In 1884 we took samples of a growing wheat crop at different stages of its progress, 
commencing on June 21, and determind the dry matter, ash, and nitrogen in them. Calcu- 
lation of the results showed that, while during little more than five weeks from June 21 
there was comparatively little increase in the amount of nitrogen accumulated over a given 
area, more than half the total carbon of the crop was accumulated during that period. 

Snyder's analyses h show that of the total amount of nitrogen 
taken up by the wheat plant, 85.97 per cent is removed from the soil 
within fifty days after coming up, 88.6 per cent by time of heading 
out, and 95.4 per cent by the time the kernels are in the milk. 

Adorjan*' finds that assimilation of plant food from the soil is not 
proportional to the formation of dry matter in the plant, but that 
it proceeds more rapidly in the early stages of growth. During early 
growth nitrogen is the principal requirement. The nitrogen stored 

" On the Composition of the Ash of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 
h Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletin 29, pp. 152-160. 

c Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 14, p. 436, from Jour. Landw., 50 (1902), 
pp. 193-230. 



20 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

up at that time is, he says, used later for the development of the 
grain. 

It is too well known to require substantiation by experimental 
evidence that the yield of grain per acre and the weight of the indi- 
vidual kernel increase as the grain approaches ripeness. It is there- 
fore quite evident that immaturity, although resulting in a higher 
percentage of nitrogen in the wheat kernel, would curtail the pro- 
duction of nitrogen b} T the crop, and, furthermore, that the produc- 
tion of proteids would be still further lessened by reason of the 
greater proportion of amid substances present in the grain at that 
time. 

INFLUENCE OF IMMATURE SEED UPON YIELD. 

Georgeson " selected kernels from wheat plants that were fully ripe, 
and from plants cut while the grain was in the milk. He seeded these 
at the same rate on 2 one-tenth acre plots of land. The immature 
seed yielded at the rate of 19.75 bushels per acre of grain and 0.8 ton 
of straw, while the mature seed produced 22 bushels of grain and 
1.04 tons of straw per acre. Georgeson says that in a similar experi- 
ment the previous year the difference in favor of the mature seed 
was still more pronounced. 

Although the evidence is limited, it may safely be considered that 
the use of immature seed will result in a smaller yield of wheat than 
if fully ripe seed be used. 

INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 

Lawes and Gilbert* state that "high maturation in the wheat crop 
as indicated by the proportion of dressed corn in total corn, propor- 
tion of corn in total product (grain and straw), and heavy weight of 
grain per bushel, is, other things being equal, generally associated 
with a high percentage of dry substance and a low percentage of both 
mineral and nitrogenous constituents." This is based upon the 
wheat crops at Rotliamsted for the years 1845 to 1854, inclusive. 

More recent publications' by these investigators reaffirm their 
belief that the composition of the wheat kernel depends more largely 
upon the conditions that affect its degree of development than upon 
any other factor. They found almost invariably that a season that 
favored a long and continuous growth of the plant after heading, 
resulting in a large 3"ield of grain, a high weight per bushel, and a 
plump kernel, produced a kernel of low nitrogen content. 

"Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 4, p. 407, from Kansas Experiment Station 
Bulletin 33, p. 50. 

& On Some Points in the Composition of Wheat Grain, London, 1857. 

c Our Climate and Our Wheat Crops, London, 1SS0, and On the Composition of the Ash 
of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 



INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 



21 



Kornicke and Werner " cite an experiment in which winter wheat 
grown in Poppelsdorf for several years was sent to and grown in the 
moist climate of Great Britain, in Germany, and in the continental 
climate of Russia (steppes). The results were as follows: 





Number 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Percentage of— 


Locality 


of exper- 
iments. 


100 
plants. 


Kernels 
from 100 
plants. 


Grain. 


Straw. 




37 
18 
19 


000 
500 
365 


227 
204 
160 


37.8 
40.8 
44.0 


62.3 




59.2 




56.0 







These investigators conclude from the results that in a moist cli- 
mate relatively more straw and less grain are produced than in a dry, 
warm climate. The thickness of the straw and the weight of the 
kernels from 100 heads are greater, while the percentage by weight 
of kernels to straw is much less in a moist climate. They also quote 
Haberlandt as saying that a continental climate produces a small, 
hard wheat kernel, rich in gluten and of especially heavy weight. 

Deherain and Dupont 6 report some interesting observations as to 
the effect of climate on the composition of wheat. They state that the 
harvest of 1888 at Grignon was late and the process of ripening slow. 
There was a heavy yield of grain having a gluten content of 12.60 per 
cent and a starch content of 77.2 per cent. The following season was 
dry and hot, with a rapid ripening of the grain, resulting in a smaller 
crop. The gluten content of the grain was 15.3 per cent and the 
starch content 61.9 per cent. They removed the heads from a num- 
ber of plants. The next day the steins were harvested, as were also 
an equal number of entire plants. The stems without heads showed 
that carbohydrates equal to 5.94 per cent of the dry matter had been 
formed. The stems on which the heads remained one day longer 
contained 1.63 per cent carbohydrates. They argue from this that 
the upper portion of the stem, provided it is still green, performs the 
functions of the leaves in other plants and thus elaborates the starch 
that fills out the kernel in its later development. 

A report from the Ploti Experiment Station ' states that the con- 
ditions that favored an increase in yield caused a reduction in the 
relative proportion of nitrogen in the grain. Excessive humidity 
favored the process of assimilation of carbohydrates, while drought 
hastened maturation and produced a grain relatively rich in proteids. 

a Handbuch des Getreidebaues, Berlin, 1884, pp. 69, 70. 
''Ann. Agron., 1902, p. 522. 

'Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 14, p. 340, from Sept. Rap An. Sta. Expt. 
Agron. Ploty, 1901, pp. xiv-180. 



22 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

Wiley " sent wheat of the same origin to California, Kentucky, 
Maryland, and Missouri. The original grain and the product from 
each State were analyzed. The results of one year's test were 
reported. Regarding the effect of climate, he says: 

There appears to be a marked relation between the content of protein matter and starch 
and the length of the growing season. The shorter the period of growth and the cooler the 
climate the larger the content of protein and the smaller the content of starch, and vice 
versa. 

Shindler/' in his book upon this subject, says (p. 75) : 

With the length of the growing period, especially with the length of the interval between 
bloom and ripeness, varies not only the size of the kernel, but also the relative amount of 
carbohydrates and protein it contains. 

Again, on page 76, Shindler says: 

All this shows that the protein constituent of the kernel depends in the first place upon 
the length of the growing period and next upon the richness of the soil. 

Melikov c made analyses of different varieties of wheat of the crops 
of the years 1885-1899 grown in southern Russia. The protein 
varied in different years from 14 to 21.2 per cent. Melikov concludes 
that the nitrogen content is highest in dry years and lowest in years 
of larger rainfall, in which years the yield of wheat per acre is also 
greater. 

Gurney and Morris,"' in one of their reports, say: 

This increased gluten [over previous years] is probably largely due to differences in the 
seasons, the weather being hot and dry while the grain was ripening, since it is character- 
istic not of these wheats alone but of most of the grain grown in the colony. 

The conclusion to be inevitably derived from these observations 
is that climate is a potent factor in determining the yield and compo- 
sition of the wheat crop, and, further, that its effect is produced by 
lengthening or shortening the growing season, particularly that por- 
tion of it during which the kernel is developing. A moderately cool 
season, with a liberal supply of moisture, has the effect of prolonging 
the period during which the kernel is developing, thus favoring its 
filling out with starch, the deposition of which is much greater at 
that time than is that of nitrogenous material. With this goes an 
increase in volume weight and an increased yield of grain per acre. 
On the other hand, a hot, dry season shortens the period of kernel 
development, curtails the deposition of starch, leaving the per- 

a Yearbook U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1901, pp. 299-308. 

l > Der Weizen in seinem Beziehungen zum Klima und das Gesetz der Korrelation, Berlin, 
1893. 

<' Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 13 p. 451 , from Zhur. Opuitn. Agron., 1 (1900), 
pp. 256-267. 

''Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 12, pt, 2, pp. 1403-1424. 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON YIELD. 



23 



centage of nitrogen relatively higher, and gives a grain of lighter 
weight per bushel and smaller yield per acre. 

The fact that one variety of wheat is adapted to a hot, dry climate 
and another to a cool, moist one does not mean that the former under- 
goes as complete maturation as the latter, even though the grain is not 
shriveled. This is shown by the fact that a variety of wheat well 
adapted to a hot, dry climate will, when planted in a cool, moist one, 
immediately grow plumper and the kernel weight will increase, as 
was the case in the experiment of taking Minnesota wheats to Maine. 

INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 

In considering the effect of the soil upon the wheat crop there will 
naturally be included experiments designed to show the effect of 
fertilizers upon the crops. It is, in fact, upon experiments with fer- 
tilizers that we must depend for most of our information on this 
subject. 

Experiments to ascertain the effect of fertilizers upon the composi- 
tion of the wheat kernel were conducted by Lawes and Gilbert for a 
period of years extending from 1845 to 1854/' Plots of land in 
which wheat was grown continually were treated annuall} T as follows : 
Unmanured, manured with ammoniacal fertilizer alone, and manured 
with ammoniacal fertilizer and proportionate amounts of mineral 
salts. In composition calculated to dry matter, the wheat on the 
plots receiving ammoniacal fertilizer alone contained quite uniformly 
a slightly larger amount of nitrogen than either of the other two. 
The averages for the ten years were as follows : 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 



Percentage of— 



Nitrogen 
in dry 
matter. 



Unmanured 2. 13 

Ammonium salts 2. 26 

Minerals and ammonium salts ' 2. 22 



Ash in 

dry 
matter. 



2.07 
1.85 
1.96 



Weight 
of grain 

per 
bushel 

(pounds) 



58.51 

58.9 
60.2 



Percent- 
age of 
good 

kernels. 



90.6 
90.3 
92.8 



Yield per 

acre 
(pounds). 



1,045 
1,668 
1,969 



There was practically no difference in the nitrogen content of the 
straw. From these experiments the authors quoted conclude that 
there is no evidence that the nitrogen content of the wheat kernel 
can be increased at pleasure by the use of nitrogenous manures. 

Ptitthausen and Pott b report an experiment in which plots of land 
were manured (1) with superphosphate alone, (2) with nitrate alone, 
(3) with a mixture of superphosphate and nitrate, and (4) were left 

« On Some Points in the Composition of Wheat Grain, London, 1857. 
?'Landw. Vers. Stat., 16 (1873), pp. 384-399. . 



24 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

The following is a 



unmanured. There were three plots of each 
tabulated statement of their results: 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 



Weight of 

52 c. c. of 

kernels 

(grams) . 



Unfertilized 

Superphosphate 

Nitrate 

Superphosphate and nitrate 



1,306 
1,339 
1,413 
1,451 



Yield of 

grain on 

plot 

(kilos). 



2.72 
2.30 
2.03 



Percentage 

of nitrogen 

in dry 

matter. 



2.60 
3.49 
3.43 
3.62 



It will be noticed that the effect of the nitrate fertilizer was to 
decrease the yield of grain, but to increase the size of the kernel and 
its content of nitrogen. 

Wolff/' as early as 1856, in summing up the experiments of Hermb- 
stadt, Muller, and John with barley, and of Lawes and Gilbert with 
wheat, says: 

In the presence of a sufficient amount of phosphoric acid and alkali the effect of manuring 
with an easily soluble nitrogen compound is an improvement in the grain both in quantity 
and quality [meaning plumper kernels]. The kernels decrease in percentage of nitrogen, 
but become plumper, become absolutely and relatively richer in starch, and have a better 
appearance and a higher commercial value. But when the nitrogenous food in the soil 
exceeds a certain relation to the temperature and rainfall the quality of the grain becomes 
poorer [harder], it becomes lighter and smaller, takes on a dark°r color, and generally 
becomes richer in percentage of nitrogen in the air-dry substance. 

Von Gohren^ also reports results of experiments in fertilizing wheat. 
All experiments were apparently made in the same year. He grew 
the crop on six different plots of land, five of which were manured and 
each with a different fertilizer. In the crop he distinguished between 
large kernels and small kernels to show the quality of the product. 
Determinations of proteids and starch were made, and these were 
calculated to the yield of each constituent on each plot. 

The following table shows the yield of each of the characters deter- 
mined, and compares those raised on the unmanured plot with those 
on the manured ones by taking the former as one and reducing the 
others to the corresponding figure: 



Mild and percentage. 



Unferti- 
lized. 



Vieldofgrain 1.000 1.011 

Yield of large kernels l.ooo .146 

Yield of small kernels ; 1.000 .953 

Yield of proteids 1.000 .999 

Yield of starch 1.000 1.009 

Percentage of proteids ' 14.42 I 14.25 

Percentage of sta reh 62. 67 62. 56 





Bat 


Oil cake 


oil cake. 


and 






ashes. 


1.071 


1.143 


1.215 


1.928 


2. 552 


2. 226 


.704 


. 5 18 


.781 


.915 


.936 


1.070 


1.081 


1. 174 


1.264 


12.70 


11.81 


12.70 


63.25 


tit. 41 


65.24 



Peruvian 
guano. 



1. 286 
2.786 
.642 
1. 114 
1.303 
13.22 
63. 55 



The results show an increased yield from the use of fertilizers, the 
production increasing with the application of complete manures. 

« Die naturgesetzlichen Grundlagen des Ackerbauer, Leipzig, 1856, p. 774. 
&Landw. Vers. Stat., 6 (1864), pp. 1,5-19. 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON YIELD. 



25 



The yield of grain of good quality increases in the same way, and the 
yield of grain of poor quality decreases proportionately. It must be 
remembered that by good quality of grain in these early writings is 
meant plump kernels and not necessarily what would be considered 
wheat of good milling quality at the present day. The production of 
proteids per acre decreased with the use of the incomplete fertilizers, 
ashes and oil cake, and even with the bat guano. It increased, how- 
ever, with the use of oil cake and ashes combined and of Peruvian 
guano. The percentage of proteids was greatest in the unfertilized 
grain and the percentage of starch least, with the exception of one 
fertilized plot. 

The very evident effect of the fertilizers in this case was to produce 
a more completely matured kernel. It will be noticed that the plots 
producing grain of highest starch content were those having the 
greatest proportion of plump kernels. 

Again, in 1884, Lawes and Gilbert" report results obtained from 
manured and unmanured soils. These experiments cover a period of 
sixteen years and are divided into two periods of eight } T ears each. In 
one of these periods the seasons were favorable for wheat, in the other 
unfavorable. 



Favorable seasons. 



Unfavorable seasons. 



Barnyard Un- 

manure. manured. 



Weight of grain per bushel 
(pounds) 

Percentage of grain to straw. 

Grain per acre (pounds) 

Straw per acre (pounds) 

Percentage of nitrogen in dry 
matter 

Percentage of ash in dry mat- 
ter 

Nitrogen per bushel (pounds) 



62.6 

62.5 

2,342.0 

6,089.0 

1. 73 

1.98 
1.083 



60. 5 

67.4 

1,156.0 

2,872.0 

1.84 

1.96 
1. 113 



Ammo- 
nium salts 
alone. 



Barnyard 
manure. 



60.4 
66.2 

1,967.0 
4, 774. 

2.09 

1.74 
1.262 



.57.4 

.54. 5 

1,967.0 

5,574.0 

1.96 

2. 06 
1.125 



Un- 
manured. 



Ammo- 
nium salts 
alone. 



54. 3 

51.1 

823.0 

2,433.0 

1.98 

2.08 
1.075 



53. 7 

46.7 

1,147.1) 

3,601.0 

2.25 

1.91 
1.208 



It is evident from this statement that the largest crops and best 
developed kernels were obtained from the soils treated with barnyard 
manure, and that these kernels contained the lowest percentage of 
nitrogen. The crops on unmanured soil stood next in these respects, 
except in yield. Those on the soil receiving ammonium salts pro- 
duced the most poorly developed kernels and those of highest nitrogen 
content, but gave larger yields than the unmanured soil. 

In the unmanured soil there was a very evident lack of plant food, 
as indicated by the light crops. The effect upon the kernel was to 
curtail its development, leaving it of light weight and with a relatively 
high nitrogen content. 



a On the Composition of the Ash of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 



26 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Hermbstadt obtained some curious results, as quoted by D. G. F. 
MacDonald/' as follows: 

He sowed equal quantities of wheat upon the same ground and manured them with equal 
weights of the different manures set forth below. From 100 parts of each sample of grain 
produced he obtained starch and gluten in the following proportions: 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 



Gluten. 


Starch. 


9.2 


66.7 


9.6 


65.94 


12.0 


62.3 


12.2 


63.2 


13.7 


61.64 


32.9 


42.4 


32.9 


42.8 


33. 14 


41.44 


34.24 


41.43 


31.1 


39.3 



Produce. 



Unfertilized 

Pota to peels 

Cow dung 

Pigeon dung 

Horse dung 

Goat dung 

Sheep dung 

Dried night soil. . . 

Dried ox blood 

Dried human urine 



Threefold. 

Fivefold. 

Sevenfold. 

Ninefold. 

Tenfold. 

Twelvefold. 

Do. 
Fourteenfold. 

Do. 
Twelvefold. 



These results are not to be considered seriously, representing as 
they do an impossible condition. 

Prof. H. A. Huston 6 treated 0.01-acre plots of land each with 
nitrate of soda, dried blood, sulphate of ammonia, rotted stable 
manure, and muck, respectively, either in the autumn or spring, or 
in both seasons. In 1891 all the plots treated with nitrogenous com- 
pounds showed marked increase in the percentage of nitrogen in the 
grain. In 1892 the results were by no means so uniform and would 
not justify the conclusion that nitrogenous fertilizers increased the 
nitrogen content of the wheat. 

Vignon and Conturier*" tested the effect of phosphate fertilizer 
alone upon the nitrogen content of the grain of two varieties of wheat. 
On Plot 1 they used 75 kilograms of phosphoric acid per hectare; on 
Plot 2, 150 kilograms, and on Plot 3, 225 kilograms. 





Variety. 


Percentage of nitrogen in 
grain. 




Plot 1. 


Plot 2. 


Plot 3. 




1.83 
2.07 


1.61 
1.98 


1.54 


Riete 


1.82 











There was a very evident decrease in the nitrogen content of the 
crop as the quantity of fertilizer was increased. 

It was concluded from experiments conducted at the Ploti Experi- 
ment Station d that, with favorable meteorological conditions, manure 
increased the total amount of nitrogen taken up by wheat, but, 

« Practical Hints on Farming, London, 1868. 
''Indiana Experiment Station Bulletins 41 and 45. 
cCompt. Rend., 132 (1901), p. 791. 

tf Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 14, p. 340, from Sept. Rap. An. Sta. Expt. 
Agron. Ploty, 1901, pp. xiv-180. 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL UPON YIELD. 



27 



although it thus increased the total production of nitrogen, it 
decreased the relative proportion of nitrogenous substance. 

Bogdau " conducted investigations the results of which indicated 
that with an increase in the soluble salt content of 22 alkali soils the 
nitrogen and ash contents of the wheat kernels increased, but the 
absolute weight of the kernels diminished. These soluble salts are 
rich in nitrates. 

Experiments were conducted by Whitson, Wells, and Vivian'' in 
which plants were grown in pots the soils of which were in some cases 
fertilized with nitrates and in others with leachings of single and 
of double strengths from fertile soils. Field experiments were con- 
ducted on manured and unmanured plots. All of the analyses, 
except in the case of oats, were of the whole plant. Of the ripe oat 
kernels those from the unfertilized soil contained 2.57 per cent of 
nitrogen, while the average of those from the fertilized soil was 2.78 
per cent. 

Guthrie'' conducted experiments with fertilizers for wheat during 
two years, in which he kept a record of the yield and gluten content of 
the grain. The following is a statement of the results: 



Kind of fertilizer, if any. 



Experiments in 1901— 



At Wagga. 



Yield 
per acre 

(bush- 
els). 



Percent- 
age of 
gluten. 



At Bathurst. 



per'acl-e Percent " 



gluten. 



Experiments ii 
1902, at Wagga. 



Yield IPercent- 
per acre | ^cent 

gluten. 



(bush- 
els). 



None 

Ammonium sulphate 

Superphosphate 

Potassium sulphate 

Ammonium sulphate, superphosphate, 
potassium sulphate 



7.7 
8.7 
13.3 
13.0 

10.0 



11.99 
10.43 
12.06 

12.02 

11.70 



13 
16 

13.5 
13.0 

13.7 



11.80 
11.21 
12.01 
11.29 

12. 05 



17.6 
17.6 
22.6 

19.2 

20.3 



9.8 
8.7 
11.4 
10.0 

12.0 



In this experiment there was in each case a higher percentage of 
gluten in the wheat raised on the fertilized soil than in that from the 
soil fertilized, with ammonium sulphate, and in the latter less than in 
the grain fertilized with other material. 

The most striking feature of these results is their apparent lack of 
uniformity. In some cases the use of nitrogenous fertilizers was 
accompanied by an increase in the nitrogen content of the grain and 
in other cases no increase appeared; in some cases phosphoric acid 
fertilizers apparently increased the nitrogen content and in others 
they did not have this effect. 

Climatic influences have doubtless operated largely in these results, 
but they are not considered by any of the experimenters except Wolff. 

"Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 13, p. 329, from Report of Department of Agri- 
culture, St. Petersburg, 1600. 

k Wisconsin Experiment Station Report, 19 (1902), pp. 192-209. 

c Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 13 (1902), No. 0, p. 664; and No. 7, p. 728. 



28 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

It is evident that in all experiments with depleted soils the plants on 
the plots receiving complete fertilizers would take up larger amounts 
of plant food, including nitrogen, than would plants on unmanured 
soils. Am T conditions that would prevent the normal ripening of the 
crop on both soils would therefore leave a higher percentage of nitro- 
gen in the plants upon the unmanured soil. On the other hand, 
under conditions which would permit of a complete maturation of the 
crop there might be no difference in the composition of the grain from 
the manured and unmanured soils. It is evident, however, that the 
production of both nitrogen and starch in pounds per acre would be 
greater on the manured soils. 

Another condition that may affect the results is the arrested devel- 
opment of kernels on unmanured soils that are seriously depleted of 
plant food. Such depletion may interfere with complete maturation 
of the crop while the crop on the manured soil will mature fully. In 
consequence the grain on the unmanured soil will contain a higher 
percentage of nitrogen but a smaller yield per acre. The use of a 
nitrogenous manure alone on exhausted soils may likewise result in 
a grain of higher nitrogen content. 

Expressed in a more general way, this means that wheat of the 
same variety grown under the same climatic conditions will have 
approximately the same percentage of nitrogen if allowed to mature 
fully, but any permanent interruption in the process of maturation 
will result in a higher percentage of nitrogen, and in the latter case the 
percentage of nitrogen will depend upon the stage at which develop- 
ment was interrupted , and also upon the amount of nitrogen accumu- 
lated by the plant, that being greater on soils manured with nitroge- 
nous fertilizers alone than on exhausted soils, and greater on soils 
receiving complete manures than on exhausted soils receiving only 
nitrogenous fertilizers, provided the stage at which development 
ceased be the same in both cases. It thus happens that wheat grow- 
ing on the soil allowing it to absorb the largest amount of nitrogen 
will, other things being equal, have a higher nitrogen content if the 
development of the kernel be permanently checked, although if it 
were allowed to mature fully it would not have a greater percentage 
of nitrogen than that grown on the soil affording less nitrogen. 

Reviewing the experiments, we find that in Lawcs and Gilbert's 
first experiment the percentage of nitrogen in the unmanured soil was 
less than on the soil receiving only nitrogenous fertilizer, and that the 
weight of grain per bushel and the percentage of good kernels on the 
two plots were practically the same. It would not appear, therefore, 
that the wheat on the plot receiving the nitrogenous fertilizer was less 
well matured than that on the unmanured plot. In this case there 
appears to be a slight increase in the percentage of nitrogen, due 
entirely to the use of nitrogenous fertilizers. Comparing the grain on 



INFLUENCE OF SOIL MOISTURE UPON YIELD, 



29 



the plot receiving only nitrogenous fertilizer with that receiving the 
complete fertilizer it will be seen that the former has a higher percent- 
age of nitrogen, but this is evidently due to the poorly developed ker- 
nels which weigh less per bushel than the grain on the completely 
fertilized plot. 

Von Gohren's results show plainly that the kernels on the manured 
land developed better than on the unmanured, and with this better 
development there was an increase in the percentage of starch and a 
decrease in the nitrogen. 

In Lawes and Gilbert's second experiment the percentage of nitro- 
gen in the wheat on the soil manured with ammonium salts was less 
than that in the wheat on the unmanured soil, but the weight of grain 
per bushel shows that the higher nitrogen content was due, in part at 
least, to incomplete maturation. The higher percentage of nitrogen 
in the wheat on the soil receiving only nitrogenous manures as com- 
pared with that receiving complete manures can be traced to the same 
condition of the grain. 

INFLUENCE OF SOIL MOISTURE UPON COMPOSITION AND YIELD. 

Experiments were conducted by D. Prianishinkov " in which wheat 
was raised with different degrees of moisture, but in the same soil and 
under the same conditions of light and temperature. With a larger 
amount of moisture in the soil there was a lower nitrogen content in 
the grain. It was also stated that the duration of the period of vege- 
tation was somewhat shorter when the moisture supply was greater. 

Traphagen'' reports marked changes in the composition of wheat 
grown with and without irrigation at the Montana Experiment 
Station. A wheat grown under irrigation on the station farm was 
planted the following year on land not irrigated. Presumably the 
land was of similar character. The two crops of grain were analyzed 
and the percentages stated below were found. 



Crop. 



Irrigated wheat. . . 
Unirrigated wheat. 



Mois- 
ture. 



Per ct. 
7.87 
7.65 



Crude 
protein. 



Per ct. 
8.81 
14.41 



Ether 
extract. 



Per ct. 
1.93 
2.23 



Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 



Per ct. 
76.99 
71.33 



Crude 
fiber. 



Per ct. 
2.60 
2.65 



Ash. 



Per ct. 
1.80 
1.70 



No records of yields or of weights of kernels are given, but it is fair 
to suppose that the unirrigated wheat possessed the light, shrunken 
kernel which is characteristic of wheat raised without sufficient 
moisture. 



"Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 13, p. 631, from Zhur. Opuitn. Agron., 1 (1900), 
No. 1, pp. 13-20. 

*> Montana Experiment Station Report (1902), pp. 59-60. 



30 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Irrigation experiments were conducted by Widtsoe " in which wheat 
of the same variety was raised on plots of land each one of which 
received a different quantity of water. A record was kept of the 
yield and composition of the grain on each plot. 





Water 
applied 

(inches). 


Yield 


Percentage of — 


Yield (in pounds) 
per acre of — 


Plot. 


per acre 

(bush- 
els). 


Protein 
in grain. 


Ash in 
grain. 


Nitrogen. 


Ash. 


317 


4.63 


4.50 


24.8 


2.50 


10.7 


6.75 


319 


5.14 


3.83 


23.2 


3.07 


8.5 


7.05 


320 


8.73 


10.33 


19.9 


2.54 


19.7 


15.74 


318 


8.89 


11.33 


19.4 


2.93 


21.1 


19.72 


321 


10.30 


14.66 


18.4 


2.34 


25.9 


20.24 


325 


12.00 


11.16 


21.3 


3.25 


22.8 


21.44 


322 


12.18 


11.66 


23.1 


2.88 


25.8 


20.30 


326 


12.80 


13.00 


17.1 


2.52 


21.3 


21.50 


327 


1.7.50 


15.33 


17.2 


2.57 


25.3 


23.64 


328 


21.11 


17.33 


15.9 


2.34 


26.4 


24.33 


329 


30.00 


26.66 


14.0 


4.14 


35.8 


66.20 


330 


40.00 


14.50 


17.1 


2.52 


23.8 


21.92 



The results show that with an increase in the water used for irriga- 
tion up to 30 inches there were in general an increase in the yield of 
grain and a decrease in the nitrogen content. No volume weights 
or other means of judging of the development of the kernels on the 
different plots are given, but there is no reason to suppose that the 
grain on the plots receiving small quantities of water was not poorly 
developed. The column added showing the yield of nitrogen in 
pounds per acre indicates a lack of nutriment in the grain on these 
plots/' 

High nitrogen content arising from a small supply of soil moisture 
is sometimes due to a restricted development of the kernel. There 
is nothing in these results to indicate a greater absorption of nitrogen 
by the crop on soil having less moisture, but results of this nature 
are cited elsewhere in this bulletin. 



INFLUENCE OF SIZE OR WEIGHT OF THE SEED-WHEAT KERNEL UPON 

THE CROP YIELD. 

Sanborn ( ' reports experiments to ascertain the effect of separating 
seed wheat into kernels of different grades to ascertain the effect upon 
the yield. He divided the kernels into large, medium, small, ordinary 
(grain as it came from the thrasher), and shriveled, and continued 
the experiments for four years. Apparently the large kernels were 
separated from the crop grown from large seed the previous year, and 

a Utah Experiment Station Bulletin 80. 

''Nitrogen has been calculated from proteids by dividing by 6.25. 

c Utah Experiment Station Report, 1893, p. 168. 



INFLUENCE OF SIZE OR WEIGHT OF SEED KERNEL. 



31 



so with the other classes of kernels. He tabulates his results as 
follows : 



Kind of seed. 


Yield of grain on plots 
pounds). 


(in 


Average 
fori 
years. 




1890, 


1891. 


1892. 


1893. 


Bushels 
per acre. 




S8.5 


72.:, 
70.0 
105. 
95.0 
43.0 


Ill 
87 
64 

87 
78 


63.0 
67.0 
74.0 
29.5 
31.0 


18.72 




16.60 


Small. 


94.0 
84.0 


18.72 


Ordinary 


16.42 
11.25 











The relation between yields of the crops representing different 
sized kernels is so irregular from year to year that suspicion is 
aroused regarding the accuracy of the results, due to lack of uni- 
formity in soil. Sanborn's conclusion is that very little, if any, 
advantage is to be gained by separating seed wheat and planting 
the large kernels. 

At the Indiana Experiment Station, Latta" conducted experi- 
ments in which wheat was separated by means of a fanning mill into 
heavy and light kernels, but impurities and chaffy seed were fanned 
out of each lot of wheat. The experiments were continued three 
years, but the separations were made each year from seed that had 
not been so separated the year before. The average gain from the 
large seed for three years was 2.5 bushels per acre. 

Georgeson, 6 at the Kansas station, seeded plots of land with (1) 
light seed weighing 56 pounds per bushel, (2) common seed weighing 
62.5 pounds, (3) heavy seed weighing 63 pounds, and (4) selected 
seed, obtained by picking the largest and finest heads in the field just 
before the crop was cut, weighing 61.5 pounds per bushel. Seed was 
separated each year from wheat not grown from previously selected 
seed. The average results for three years were as follows: 



Grade of seed. 



Light.... 
Common . 



Yield of 

grain 
per aore 

(bush- 
els). 



25.19 

26.57 



Grade of seed. 



Heavy 

Select (average for 2 years) . 



Yield of 
grain 

per acre 
(bush- 
els). 



27.07 
25. 82 



Desprez reports experiments extending through three years in 
which large kernels were selected from a crop grown from large seed 

« Indiana Experiment Station Bulletin 36, pp. 110-128. 
^ Kansas Experiment Station Bulletin 40, pp. 51-62. 

c Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 7, p. 679, from Jour. Agr. Prat., 59 (1895), 2, 
pp. 694-698. 



32 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

for several years and small seed from a crop grown from small seed 
for several years. Five varieties of wheat were used. The average 
results for three years were a difference of 1,067 to 1,828 kilograms 
of grain per hectare in favor of the large seed, but the difference was 
in general greater the first year than later. The use of large seed 
gave a crop with kernels larger than those grown from small seed. 

Middle ton" reports the yields obtained from large wheat kernels 
to be almost double those obtained from small seed kernels. 

Bolley/' as the results of experiments continuing for four years in 
which plump kernels of large size and plump kernels of small size 
were selected for seed, concludes that "perfect grains of large size 
and greatest weight produce better plants than perfect grains of 
small size and light weight, even when the grains come from the same 
head." 

At the Ontario Agricultural College, Zavitz r selected large plump 
seed, small plump seed, and shrunken seed of both spring and winter 
wheat. Experiments were continued for eight years with spring 
wheat and five years with winter wheat, the selections each year 
being from a crop grown from previously unselected seed. His 
results are as follows: 





Kind of seed. 


Yield per acre (in 
bushels). 




Spring 
wheat. 


Winter 
wheat. 




21.7 
18.0 

Hi. 7 


42.4 




34.8 




33.7 







Deherain and Dupont/ 7 report that the yields from small and large 
kernels of a number of varieties of wheat were in all cases in favor of 
the large kernels, but a large difference in yield was obtained only 
when there was a marked difference in the weight of the kernels. 

Soule and Vanatter' ; conducted experiments for three years in 
which large and small kernels were separated by means of sieves. 
In addition a plot of unselected seed was planted. The large seed 
was, each year after the first, selected from the crop grown from 
large seed the previous year. The same was true of the small seed. 
These investigators say: 

(> Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 12, p. 441, from Univ. Coll. of Wales Rept., 
1899, pp. 68-70. 

6 North Dakota Experiment Station Report, 1901, p. 30. 

'' Ontario Agricultural College and Experiment Farm Report, 1901, p. 84. 

<* Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 15, p. 672, from Compt. Rend., 135 (1902), 
p. 654. 

« Tennessee Experiment Station Bulletin, vol. 16, No. 4, p. 77. 



INFLUENCE OF SIZE OR WEIGHT OF SEED KERNEL. 



33 



The average difference in yield at the end of three years between large grains (607 per 
ounce), commercial sample (689 per ounce), and small grains (882 per ounce), with Med- 
iterranean wheat, was 2.06 bushels in favor of large grains as compared with the commercial 
sample, and 5.18 bushels in favor of large grains over small grains. The difference in yield 
between the large grains and the commercial sample chiefly occurred the first year; but it 
is possible, though hardly probable, that the difference was partly due to variation in the 
soil. The experiment has been carried on in different parts of the field for the last two 
years, and the difference in yield is now only 0.32 bushel per acre in favor of the large grains. 

Cobb a reports tests of various grades of wheat kernels with respect 
to size, and concludes that large kernels give better yields of grain. 
The seed of one year was not the product of the corresponding grade 
of the previous one. 

Grenf ell b selected plump and shriveled kernels from the same bulk 
of grain. Of these 150 kernels were sown in each row, with rows of 
plump and shriveled kernels alternating. The germination in both 
rows appeared much alike, but the plants in the rows sown from 
plump grain soon began to gain on the others and kept ahead for the 
remainder of the season. The tillering was better in the plump- 
grain plants. Grenf ell tabulates his results thus: 



Variety. 



Kind. 



Steimvedel Plump 

Do Shriveled . 

Purple Straw do 

Do Plump 

Do ' Shriveled. 

Do Plump 

Do i Shriveled . 

Plump-kernel averages 

Shriveled-kernel averages 



P oTpTan a r| e ' Number Tillering 
tha?grew. ofheads -l P™- 



9fi.O 
89.3 
89.3 
90.0 
76.0 
92.0 
98.0 



92.7 
88.5 



179 
174 
153 
200 
140 
161 
155 



180 
155 



1.24 
1.29 
1.14 
1.49 
1.16 
1.23 
1.34 



1.32 
1.23 



Average 
yield per 
acre 
(bush- 
els). 



10.9 
9.9 
6.1 

10 
6.9 
8.4 
7.2 



9.8 
7.5 



As bearing upon this subject some experiments conducted by 
Riinker ( ' are of interest. He weighed each of the kernels of a large 
number of heads of wheat of the Spalding Prolific and Martin Amber 
varieties, and found that the heaviest kernels occur in the lower half 
of the spike. With spikes of different lengths and weights, the 
weight of the average kernel increases with the size of the spike. 

Weights of individual kernels from the same spikes show that 
there is a great range in this respect. One spike, of which Runker 
gives the weights of all the kernels, and which is given as representa- 
tive of the average, shows kernels varying in weight from 36 to 71 
milligrams. 

« Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 14 (1903), No. 2, pp. 145-169. 
b Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 12 (1901 ), No. 9, pp. 1053-1062. 
c Jour. f. Landw., 38 (1890), p. 309. 

27889— No. 78—05 3 



34 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

It -is therefore quite evident that a sample of wheat taken from 
spikes of different sizes when separated into lots of light and heavy 
kernels would have both the larger spikes and smaller spikes repre- 
sented in each lot of kernels, but doubtless the proportion of kernels 
from large heads would be greater in the lot of heavy kernels. 

It would appear from these results that the evidence was over- 
whelmingly in favor of large or heavy wheat kernels for seed. Most 
of the experimenters selected seed of different kinds each year without 
reference to previous selection. If large seed or small seed represent 
plants of different characteristics and if these properties are hered- 
itary, the results of selection of large or small seeds for several 
years may be quite different from what they would be the first year. 
It is only those experiments in which selection of the same kind of 
seed has been continued for several generations that may be relied 
upon to indicate the value of continuous selection of large kernels 
for seed. 

Such experiments have been conducted by Sanborn, by Desprez, 
and by Soule and Vanatter. The work of Desprez indicates that the 
size of the kernel is a hereditary quality. That being the case, it is 
evident that the small seed of the first separation may be composed 
partly of seed that is small on account of immaturity and partly of 
seed that is small by inheritance, but which is perfectly normal. 
When such seed is planted the immature seed will be largely elimi- 
nated in the crop, but the naturally small seed will have reproduced 
itself and will compose most of the crop. When the seed is again 
separated a much smaller percentage of small seed will be immature, 
and in consequence a larger number of kernels will produce plants. 
It would appear from Desprez's experiments, however, that those 
plants producing small kernels are not so prolific as those producing 
large kernels. 

Sanborn's results make a very good showing for the small kernels, 
but, as before stated, the extreme irregularity would lead to the 
belief that the soil on the plots lacked uniformity, or that some other 
errors had influenced the results. To offset this the tests cover a 
period of four years, which should help to rectify mistakes, and in 
consequence the good showing made by the small kernels is entitled 
to some consideration. 

Soule and Vanatter's results fulfill exactly the conditions of the 
hypothesis that the small seed would the first year contain a much 
larger proportion of immature kernels than it would in subsequent 
years, and hence yield more poorly the first year. Their results with 
heavy kernels as compared with ordinary seed offer little encourage- 
ment to the continuous selection of large kernels. 



RELATION OF SIZE OE KERNEL TO NITROGEN CONTENT. 35 

The fact before referred to that both large and small kernels are 
found on the same head of wheat is perhaps an argument against the 
superior value of large seed. If the plant and not the seed is the unit 
of reproduction, small seed from a plant whose kernels averaged 
large size may be better than large seed from a plant whose kernels 
averaged small size. 

On the other hand, there can be no doubt that the majority of the 
kernels in the lot of heavy kernels would be from plants having large 
spikes, and vice versa. This would give the kernels in the heavy lot 
some advantage. Again, the advantage that the large kernel is sup- 
posed to possess for seed may not be in producing a large kernel in 
the resulting crop, but in giving the plant a better start in life, or 
producing a more vigorous plant. 

RELATION OF SIZE OF KERNEL TO NITROGEN CONTENT. 

Richardson " has made a large number of analyses of wheats from 
different parts of the United States. The weight of 100 kernels was 
also determined in each sample. There can not be said to be any 
constant relation between the nitrogen content and the kernel weight, 
but in the main the large kernels have a lower percentage of nitrogen 
than the small kernels, and inversely. 

PagnouP reports that in a test of eleven varieties of wheat there 
was in the main a decrease in the percentage of nitrogen in the crop 
as compared with the seed when there was an increase in the weight 
of 1,000 kernels in the crop as compared with the seed. 

The same investigator' again states that in an examination of 
seventy varieties of wheat there was no constant relation between 
the size of the kernels and their nitrogen content, but that in general 
the varieties with small kernels were the varieties richest in nitrogen. 

Marek'^ separated wheat of the same variety into lots of large and 
of small kernels. He found on analysis that the large kernels con- 
tained 12.52 per cent protein and the small kernels 13.55 per cent 
protein. 

Woods and Merrill' made analyses of a number of wheats grown 
in Minnesota and of the same varieties grown in Maine. The wheats 
uniformly developed a larger kernel when grown in Maine. Grouping 
five varieties raised in Minnesota and five raised in Maine, it will be 
seen that with this increase in the size of the kernel there was a 

" U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Chemistry. Bulletins 1 and 3. 
>' Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1893, p. 616, from Ann. Agron., 1892, p. 486. 
c Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1888, p. 767, from Ann. Agron., 14, pp. 262-272. 
''Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1876, from Landw. Zeitung f. Westfalen u.Lippe, 
1875, p. 362. 

< Maine Experiment Station Bulletin 97. 



36 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

decrease in the nitrogen content. The analyses, reduced to a water- 
free basis, are as follows: 



Where grown. 



Weight of 

100 kernels 

(grams). 



Minnesota 2. 239 

Maine 3. 109 



Percentage 
of protein. 



16.22 
10.43 



In a review of the experiments concerning the relation of weight 
to composition of cereals, Gwallig" says that the results obtained 
by Marek, Wollny, Marcker, Hoffmeister, and Nothwang divide 
barley and rye into one group, and wheat and oats into another, as 
regards this relation. With barley and rye, the largest, heaviest 
kernels are the richest in protein. With wheat and oats, the smallest, 
lightest kernels have the highest protein content. 

Gwallig says further that w T ith an increased protein content there 
is a decrease in nitrogen- free extract. The fat and ash do not stand 
in a definite relation to the kernel weight, but the small, light kernels 
have a higher percentage of crude fiber, which circumstance is 
accounted for by the larger surface possessed by the smaller kernels. 

Snyder 6 has divided small kernels into two classes — those which 
are small because shrunken and those which are small although well 
filled. He finds that as between small kernels of the first class and 
large, well-filled kernels, the former contain a higher percentage of 
nitrogen, but as between the small, well-filled and the large, well-filled 
kernels, the latter contain the higher percentage of nitrogen. In 
testing this he used large and small kernels of the same variety in 
each case, and the wmeats represented a large portion of the wheat- 
growing area of the United States. As regards the relation of large, 
perfect, and small, perfect kernels there were twenty-four out of 
twenty-seven cases in which the large kernels contained a greater 
percentage of nitrogen. 

Johannsen and Weis,' in experiments with five varieties of wheat, 
find that as a general rule the percentage of nitrogen is increased 
with increasing grain weight, but that there are many exceptions 
to the rule. 

Cobb"' states that small wheat kernels contain a larger proportion 
of gluten than do large ones, but he does not submit any analyses to 
substantiate his statement. 

"Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 24 (1895), p. 388, from Landw. Jahrbiicher, 23 
(1894), p. 835. 

ft Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletin 85. 

c Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 12, p. 327, from Tidsskr. Landbr. Planteavl., 5 
(1899), pp. 91-100. 

('Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 5 (1894), No. 4, pp. 239-250. 



INFLUENCE OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF SEED KERNEL. 



37 



Kornicke and Werner" quote the experiments of Reiset to show 
that shriveled kernels have a higher nitrogen content than plump 
ones. With different varieties of wheat he found the following: 



Variety. 



Spalding 
Do. 

Victoria 
Do. 

Albert. . 
Do. 




Shriveled 

Plump... 
Shriveled 
Plump. . . 
Shriveled 
Plump... 



Percent- 
age of 

nitrogen 
in dry 

matter 



2. 33 

•2.44 
2.08 
2.59 
2.35 



Carleton 6 records the weight of 100 kernels and the percentage of 
'albuminoids" in sixty-one samples of wheat from various parts of 
the w T orld. Dividing these into classes according to the weight of 
100 kernels we have the following: 



Weight of 

100 kernels 

(grams). 


Average 

weight of 

kernels 

(grams). 


Percent- 
age of albu- 
minoids. 


Number 
of sam- 
ples. 


2 to 3 

3 to 4 
over 4 


2.66 

3.67 

4.57 


1 L'58 
12.31 
11.62 


6 
25 
30 



Reviewing these experiments there would seem to be no doubt 
that shrunken kernels contain a higher percentage of nitrogen than 
do well-filled ones, but as betw r een large and small kernels, both of 
which are well filled, there is not a great deal of information. Snyder's 
experiments are the only ones that cover this ground, but they are 
extensive and very uniform, and may be considered as deciding the 
question in favor of a higher nitrogen content for the large kernels, 
so far as small, plump kernels and large, plump kernels are concerned. 
But, as small and light kernels are usually not plump, taking the 
crop as a whole and dividing it equally into large and small or 
heavy and light kernels, the evidence would be in favor of the small 
or light kernels for high nitrogen content. As between w T heats from 
different regions and of different varieties, those having small kernels 
are generally of higher nitrogen content. 

INFLUENCE OF THE SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF THE SEED KERNEL UPON 

YIELD. 

Sanborn c separated seed wheat with a sieve into large, medium, 
small, and shriveled kernels. The large seed was separated by means 

"Handbuch des Getreidebaues, 1, pp. 520-521, Berlin, 1884. 

&U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Vegetable Physiology and Pathology, 
Bulletin 24. 

c Abstract, Experiment Station Record, 5, p. 58, from Utah Experiment Station Report, 
1892, pp. 133-135. 



38 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



of a brine solution into two nearly equal parts. The seed thus sepa- 
rated was planted on separate plots. The experiment was con- 
tinued three years. The heavy seed yielded 10.8 bushels and the 
light 16.3 bushels per acre. Unselected seed yielded 16.4 bushels 
per acre. 

Seed wheat of four varieties was separated by Church" by means 
of solutions of calcium chlorid having specific gravities of 1.247, 
1.293, and 1.31. The seed was first treated with a solution of mer- 
curic chlorid to remove adherent air. Each lot of seed was planted 
separately. From the results the following conclusions are drawn: 

(1) The seed wheat of the greatest density produced the densest 
seed. 

(2) The seed wheat of the greatest density yielded the largest 
amount of dressed grain. 

(3) The seed of medium density generally gave the largest number 
of ears, but the ears were poorer than those from the densest seed. 

(4) Seed of medium density generally produced the largest number 
of fruiting plants. 

(5) The seed wheat that sank in water, but floated in a solution 
having the density 1.247, was of very low value, yielding on an 
average only 34.4 pounds of dressed grain for every 100 yielded by 
the densest seed. 

Haberlandt/' as the result of experiments with several cereals, has 
shown that the comparative weight of kernels is transmitted to the 
grain resulting from this seed. This was the case with wheat, rye, 
barley, and oats. The results with wheat were as follows: 





Number of pounds. 


Weight of kernels. 




Light. 


Medium. 


Heavy. 




Grams. 
29.5 
34.3 


Grams. 
31.2 
35.5 


Grams. 

33. n 




36.3 







Wollny '' objects to the results of the experiments by F. Haberlandt, 
Church, Trommer, Hellriegel, and Ph. Dietrich with various cereals, 
in which almost without exception the kernels of high specific gravity 
produced the best yields, because no distinction was made between 
absolute weight and specific gravity in the kernels. He claims that 
the value of the seed lies in the kernels of absolutely heavy weight 
rather than in the kernels of high specific gravity. He concludes 
that the specific gravity of the seed exerts no influence on the yield 
of the crop. 

« Science with Practice. 
&Jahresb. Agr. Chem., 1866-67, p. 298. 

'Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1887, p. 169, from Forschungen a. d. Gebiete Agri- 
kulturphysik, 9 (1886), pp. 207-216. 



SPECIFIC GKAVITY AND NITROGEN CONTENT. 39 

In the light of the experiments that have been conducted with 
seed wheat of high and low specific gravities, it would appear that, 
in general, seed of very low specific gravity does not yield well, and 
it is evident that such seed must be deficient in mineral matter and 
is probably not normal in other respects. There would not appear, 
however, to be any marked difference in the productive capacity of 
kernels of medium specific gravity and kernels of great specific 
gravity. 

RELATION OF SPECIFIC GRAVITY OF KERNEL TO NITROGEN CONTENT. 

Marek" found that with an increase in the specific gravity of the 
kernel there was a decrease in nitrogen content. 

Pagnoul, 6 in testing seventy varieties of wheat, found that the 
nitrogen content rose with the specific gravity, but not regularly, 
and that a definite relation could not be traced. 

Wollny'' took kernels of horny structure and kernels of mealy 
structure. He says it is generally recognized that the hard, horny 
kernels have a higher specific gravity, and that it is commonly 
attributed to their higher content of proteids. JHe contends that as 
starch has a higher specific gravity than protein the mealy kernels 
must really have a higher specific gravity than the horny ones. 

Kornicke and Werner' 7 state the specific gravities of the various 
chemical constituents of the wheat kernel as follows: Starch, f.53; 
sugar, 1.60; cellulose, 1.53; fats, 0.9 f to 0.96; gluten, 1.297; ash, 
2.50; water, 1.00; .air, 0.001293. They state also (p. 121) that the 
specific gravity of the kernel does not stand in any relation to the 
volume weight, for the factor which results from weighing a certain 
volume mass is influenced, by the air spaces between the kernels, and 
these depend upon the form and size as well as the surface and acci- 
dental structure of the kernel. They also contend that there is no 
relation between the volume weight and the content of proteid 
material. 

Schindler*' shows that by tabulating a large number of varieties 
of wheat from different parts of the world, and representing different 
varieties, there is no relation between the weight of 1,000 kernels 
and the volume weight of 100 c. c. By separating these into varieties, 
even when grown in different localities, kernels of the same variety 
did show a definite and constant relation. The volume weight 
increased with an increase in the weight of 1,000 kernels. 



« Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1876, p. 46, from Landw. Zeitung f . Westfalen u. 
Lippe, 1875, p. 362. 

6 Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1888, p. 767, from Ann. Agron., 14, pp. 262-272. 

c Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1887, p. 169, from Forschungen a. d. Gebiete Agri- 
kulturphysik, 9 (1886), pp. 207-216. 

^ Handbuch des Getreidebaues, 2, p. 120, Berlin, 1884. 

' Jour. Landw., 45 (1897), p. 61. 



40 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



There has long been a desire manifested by workers in this field to 
establish some definite relation between the specific gravity of the 
wheat kernel and its composition, or at least its nitrogen content. 
Very contradictory results have been obtained by several experi- 
menters, and little progress has been made. 

It is true that the various chemical constituents that go to com- 
pose the wheat kernel have different specific gravities, and as those 
of the carbohydrates are all less than those of the proteids it 
might be argued that a wheat having a large proportion of proteid 
material would have a low specific gravity. However, the specific 
gravity of the ash is so much greater than that of any other constit- 
uent and the ash in wheats from different soils and climates varies so 
much that these factors completely prevent the establishment of a 
definite relation. The size and number of the vacuoles also influence 
the specific gravity. 

In general, it may be said that as between kernels of the same 
variety grown in the same season and upon the same soil, the specific 
gravity is inversely proportional to the nitrogen content. 

CONDITIONS AFFECTING THE PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN IN THE GRAIN. 

So far as the writer has been able to ascertain there is no literature 
bearing directly upon the conditions affecting the production of 
nitrogen in the grain of wheat. 

Regarding high nitrogen in the wheat crop as arising merely from 
failure on the part of the kernel to develop fully, it would seem that 
a high percentage of nitrogen would inevitably be accompanied by 
a small production of nitrogen per acre. This, however, does not 
always appear to be the case. 

Taking, for instance, the yields of wheat obtained by Lawes and 
Gilbert" for a period of twenty years, which they divide into two 
periods of good and of poor crops, each covering ten years, we have 
the following figures : 



Seasons. 



Average 
yield of 

grain per 
acre 

(pounds). 



Weight 
per bushel 
(pounds). 



Yield of 
nitrogen 
per acre 
(pounds). 



Good crop seasons. 
Poor crop seasons. 



1,833 
1,740 



60.2 
57.1 



28.0 
29.8 



It will be noticed that the largest production of nitrogen per acre 
was in those years in which the weight per bushel and the yield per 
acre were least. 

Of course this is not always the case, but that it should occur at 
all is an indication that the conditions that make for high nitrogen 



« On the Composition of the Ash of Wheat Grain and Wheat Straw, London, 1884. 



CONDITIONS AFFECTING PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN. 



41 



content in the grain also conduce to a large accumulation of nitrogen 
by the crop, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the 
conditions which favor a large accumulation of nitrogen by the crop 
often result in giving it a high nitrogen content. 

Reference has already been made to the observations of Deherain 
and Dupont" on the wheat crops of 1888 and 1889 at Grignon. The 
figures for the yields of grain, the percentages of starch and gluten, 
and the production per acre of these constituents for the two years 
are as follows: 





Yield of 

grain per 

hectare 

(kilos). 


Percentage of — 


Gluten per 
hectare 

(kilos). 


Starch per 


Year. 


Gluten. 


Starch. 


hectare 

(kilos). 


1888 


3,445 
2,922 


12. 6 
15.3 


77.2 
61.9 


434 
447 




1889... 









From this it will be seen that for the year in which the yield of 
grain was less per acre the production of gluten per acre was greater. 
Apparently the conditions were favorable for a large accumulation 
of nitrogen by the plant in 1889, but were unfavorable to the pro- 
duction of starch. If the latter had not been the case, the crop of 
1889 would have been larger than the crop of 1888. 

A number of instances of this kind have occurred among the wheat 
crops at the Nebraska Experiment Station. In fact, it may be said 
that, in general, large yields of grain have there been accompanied 
by a low percentage of nitrogen per acre as compared with the same 
properties in small yields of grain. The following table will show 
this: 

Production of nitrogen per acre in wheat raised at the Nebraska Experiment Station. 



Variety. 


Year. 


Yield of 

grain 
per acre 
(pounds). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
per acre 
(pounds). 


Date of 
ripen- 
ing. 


Turkish Red 


1900 
1901 
1902 
1903 
1900 
1901 
1903 
1902 
1903 
1902 
1903 


1,980 

2.370 
1,800 
1,864 
1,320 
1,794 
"962 
1,605 
1,891 
1,475 
1,830 


3.02 
2.00 
2.86 
2.40 
3.01 
2.18 
2.54 
3.16 
2. 10 
2.92 
2.16 


52.73 
43.04 
51.48 
44.74 
34. 58 
36.08 
24.43 
46.32 
39.71 
43.10 
39.53 




Do 




Do 




Do 


July 9 
July 2 
July 1 




Do 


Do 


July 14 
June 24 




Do 


July 10 


Pester Boden 


Do 


July 10 






1,717 




41.43 













" Yield decreased by lodging of grain. 



A word in regard to the character of the seasons that produced 
these crops may help to an understanding of their differences. 

a Ann. Agron., 28 (1902), p. 522. 



42 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

The season of 1900 was rather dry and hot from the time growth 
started in the spring until harvest. There was no time when there 
was an abundant supply of moisture, but occasional rains wet the 
soil for a few days at a time. The temperatures during the da}' 
were high and the air was dry. In 1901 the spring was quite moist 
and cool until June, when it became extremely hot and dry. A few 
days before harvest the temperatures ranged above 100° F. daily, 
with no rainfall. The season of 1902 was the direct opposite of that 
of 1901, except that the change came earlier. It was extremely dry 
and hot until the middle of May, when abundant rains came, and 
the temperatures were considerably below normal until harvest. 
The season of 1903 was wet and cool throughout. 

In general, it may be said that in those seasons, like 1900 and 
1902, in which the temperatures were high and moisture scarce dur- 
ing all or the early part of the growing season, the grain had a high 
percentage of nitrogen, and there was a large production of nitrogen 
per acre. In years of low temperatures and abundant moisture, 
as in 1903, or even when such conditions obtained late in the sea- 
son, as in 1901, there were a low percentage of nitrogen in the grain 
and a small production of nitrogen per acre. 

High temperatures and scant moisture during early growth would, 
therefore, seem to favor the accumulation of nitrogen by the wheat 
plant. 

It may also be noted that these are the conditions favorable to 
the process of nitrification and to the accumulation of nitrates near 
the surface of the soil. 

Comparing the wheat crops grown at Rothamsted for a period of 
twenty years, the yields and nitrogen production of which have just 
been stated, with the averages for the Nebraska-grown wheats con- 
tained in the last table, it will be seen that the yields of grain were 
larger at Rothamsted, but that the production of nitrogen per acre 
was considerably greater in Nebraska." 





Station. 


Yield (in pounds) 
per acre of — 




Grain. 


Nitrogen. 




1,786 

1,717 


28.9 




41.4 







The maximum production of nitrogen per acre at Rothamsted 
during the twenty years was 38.1 pounds, while at Nebraska it was 
52.7 pounds. 

There can be little doubt as to whether this difference was due 
in greater measure to soil fertility or to climate. Nowhere is better 

a The yield of nitrogen at Rothamsted is calculated from total organic nitrogen, while 
at the Nebraska Station it is from proteid nitrogen. 



CONDITIONS AFFECTING PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN. 43 

tillage given or are crops more scientifically provided with food 
than at Rothamsted. It is true that of the ten plots of land on 
which these wheats were raised one received no manure and three 
were not sufficiently manured. In order to make the comparison 
more favorable to the English environment, the five plots completely 
manured and producing the largest yields may be taken. The yield 
of nitrogen per acre was 36.4 pounds for the years 1852-1861 and 
34.6 pounds for 1862-1871. Even with the best manuring the yields 
of nitrogen fall veiy much short of those in Nebraska. 

In Nebraska no commercial fertilizers had ever been used on the 
land on which the wheats were grown, but farm manure had been 
applied. The soil was a heavy one, well adapted to wheat growing, 
and had been well tilled. It had been well manured for corn in a 
rotation of corn, oats, and wheat. The varieties, with the exception 
of Turkish Red, had just been introduced from Europe and had not 
fully adapted themselves to the new environment. The average 
nitrogen production for the only acclimated variety, Turkish Red, 
was 48 pounds per acre. It would seem, therefore, that a climate 
affording high temperatures, dry air, and a moderately dry soil is 
favorable to the accumulation of a large amount of nitrogen by the 
wheat plant, provided there is a large supply of nitrogen in the soil. 

The heat and scant soil moisture are doubtless instrumental in 
making available the nitrogen of the humus, and the bright sunshine 
and dry, hot air stimulate growth and increase transpiration. 

It has just been said that hot, dry weather in the early growing 
season contributes to a large nitrogen accumulation by the wheat 
plant. The same conditions cut short the growing period of the 
plant and prevent the large accumulation of starch that takes place 
in the kernel of wheat raised in a cool or moist region. It thus 
happens that such wheats are high in nitrogen and low in starch. 

The properties of the wheat kernel characteristic of a continental 
climate and rich soil are probably due to rapid nitrification and 
highly stimulated growth causing a large accumulation of nitrogen 
by the crop, and to incomplete maturation, caused either by heat, 
or frost, or lack of moisture, resulting in high nitrogen. 

It would be interesting to know what relation the production of 
nitrogen per acre bears to the production of mineral matter, but 
the necessary figures are not at hand. 

The wheat kernel produced in a continental climate is not usually 
plump as compared with the kernel produced in an insular or coastal 
one. The yield of grain per acre is also usually less. That this is 
due to incomplete maturation is shown by the fact that winter 
varieties of wheat that make their growth early in the season always 
yield better than, spring varieties. The latter, on the other hand, 
have a higher percentage of nitrogen, but usually not so large a 



44 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

nitrogen production. Their disadvantage lies in the fact that their 
roots are not sufficiently developed to absorb a large quantity of 
nitrogenous matter at the time most favorable for its accumulation. 
As a maximum nitrogen accumulation is the chief desideratum, 
spring wheats are not desirable where winter ones can be grown. 

This does not mean that a variety of wheat which has been grown, 
for instance, in England will show all the qualities of an inland 
wheat when first grown in Kansas or Nebraska. Such a wheat will 
undergo modifications that will give it some of these qualities, such, 
for instance, as less well-filled kernels, and less weight per bushel. 
On the other hand, the Turkish Red wheat, when raised in a cool, 
moist climate, becomes later maturing, and the kernel becomes 
plumper, more starchy, and softer. It is between varieties adapted 
each to its peculiar climate, and raised there for years, that these 
distinctions are most marked, but the fact that a modification of 
any variety begins at once when transferred from one climate to 
another shows that such qualities as those mentioned are influenced 
by the climate. 

It must be quite apparent, although it has not often been remarked, 
that the ordinary selection of seed wheat to increase the yield has 
resulted in producing a grain of lower nitrogen content. 

This has been noticed by Girard and Lindet " and by BifTen, b and. 
incidentally by Balland/' who, in commenting on the decrease in 
the nitrogen content of wheat in northern France and the increased 
yields, attributes the former to a deficiency of nitrogen in the fer- 
tilizers used, and states that the gluten in the wheat of that region 
in 1848 ranged from 10.23 to 13.02 per cent, while fifty years later 
it ranged from 8.96 to 10.62 per cent. In the same time the aver- 
age yield increased from 14 to 17.5 hectoliters per hectare. In the 
light of the results of experiments to ascertain the effect of nitroge- 
nous fertilizers upon the composition of wheat, it can not be supposed 
that this decrease in nitrogen content can be due primarily to lack 
of nitrogen. It would seem more likely that the increased yield 
was largely due to the deposition of starch in the grain, and that 
consequently the percentage of gluten was smaller. 

Has the improvement in the yield of wheat been accompanied by 
a greater yield of nitrogen per acre? It is evident that the increase 
in the grain and that in the nitrogen are not proportional, but it is 

a Le Froment et sa Monture, Paris, 1903. 
1> Nature (London), 69 (1903), No. 1778, pp. 92, 93. 

c Abstract in Centrlb. f. Agr. Chem., 1897, p. 785, from Compt. Rend., 124 (1897), 
p. 158. 



CONDITIONS AFFECTING PRODUCTION OF NITROGEN. 



45 



desirable to know whether there has been any increase in nitrogen 
per acre. Returning to the figures given by Balland it will be seen 
that the wheat of 1848 produced on an average 163 kilos per hec- 
tare, while that of fifty years later produced 171 kilos, an increase 
of about 5 per cent in gluten per hectare, with an increase of 25 per 
cent in yield. These figures can not, of course, be taken as strictly 
accurate, as they are based merely on what M. Balland refers to as 
the range of nitrogen content. 

Some data on this subject are available in the published records 
of wheat improvement at the Minnesota Experiment Station. a 
Yields and gluten content of improved varieties and of the original 
variety from which the improved strains have been developed by 
selection are given. The figures cover the same seasons for all 
varieties, and the averages of six trials are reported for each, as 
follows : 



Variety. 


Yield per 

acre 
(bushels). 


Percent- 
age of 
dry glu- 
ten. 


Gluten 
per acre 
(pounds). 


Nitrogen 
per acre 
(pounds). 




25.6 
23.6 
28.5 
24.6 


13.5 
14.0 
12.5 
13.4 


207.4 
198.2 
213.7 
198.8 


36.4 


Power's Fife, unmodified by selection 

Minnesota No. lt.9, produced from Hayne's Blue Stem 


34.8 
37.5 
34.7 







In each case the new variety yielded more grain per acre, possessed 
a lower gluten content, and produced more nitrogen per acre in the 
grain. It should be explained that determinations of gluten and 
baking tests were made of strains of wheat produced by the selection 
of individual plants, and that the quantity and quality of the gluten 
in these strains were considered in deciding which strain was to be 
perpetuated. For that reason the gluten content of the improved 
wheat is doubtless greater than it would have been if no attention 
had been paid to those qualities. Incidentally it may be stated 
that the quality of the gluten in these new varieties of wheat origi- 
nated by Professor Hays is much better than that in the original 
varieties. The difference between selection for gluten carried on in 
this way and selection for gluten applied to the individual plant is 
that the latter must increase many times the opportunity for devel- 
oping a strain of desirable gluten content. 

Returning to the nitrogen production per acre, it is apparent that 
it is slightly greater in the improved wheats, or at least is not less 
than in the original varieties. This is encouraging, as it indicates 
the possibility of increasing the production of gluten per acre. 

« Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletin 63. 



46 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

Gluten is the valuable constituent of wheat. The wheat growing 
of the future may be looked upon as a gluten-producing industry. 
The problem is to secure the highest possible quantity and quality 
of gluten per acre. If this can be done by sacrificing starch produc- 
tion, it will be economical. Starch can be more cheaply produced 
in other crops and, if necessary, added to the flour of wheat. 

It may be argued that this is not to the interest of the farmer. 
But it is clearly to the interest of mankind and any step toward 
its accomplishment must in the end redound to the advantage of 
the farmer. 



IP^IRT II. 



EXPERIMENTAL 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



If a number of wheat kernels of the same variety and raised under 
similar conditions are separated into approximately equal parts with 
regard to their specific gravity, the kernels of low specific gravity 
will be found to contain a higher percentage of both total and proteid 
nitrogen than the kernels having a high specific gravity. 

A number of samples of wheat grown in different years and repre- 
senting different varieties were separated into approximately equal 
parts by throwing the kernels into a solution of calcium chlorid hav- 
ing such a density that about half the kernels would float and the 
other half sink. The specific gravity of the solution in which each 
sample was separated is given in Table 1 and the signs < and > are 
used to represent "less than" and "greater than," respectively. 
Thus "<1.29" means that the kernels have a specific gravity of less 
than 1.29, while ">1.29" indicates that the kernels have a specific 
gravity greater than 1.29. 

Table 1 . — Analyses of kernels of high and of low specific gravity. 



Serial number. 



Specific 
gravity. 



<-1.290 
>1.290 
< 1.286 
>1.286 
<1.250 
>1.250 
<1.265 
I 265 
<1.264 
>1.264 



Percentage of 




Total 


Proteid 


Nonpro- 
teid 

nitrogen. 


nitrogen. 


nitrogen." 


3.51 


2.49 


1.02 


3.27 


2.39 


.88 


2.51 


1.88 


.63 


2.51 


1.94 


.57 


2.80 


2.26 


.54 


2.78 


2.15 


.63 


2.95 


2.13 


.82 


2.66 


2.01 


.65 


3.30 


2.41 


.89 


3.06 


2.29 


.77 



Name of variety and year of 
growth. 



[■Hickman, grown in 1895. 

J Turkish Red, grown in 1897. 

Spring wheat, Marvel, grown 

in 1897. 
| Spring wheat, Velvet Chaff 
I grown in 1897. 

Turkish Red, grown in 1898. 



a Proteid nitrogen in this paper = nitrogen by Stutzer's method. Proteids = proteid nitrogen x 5.7. 

With the exception of serial Nos. 30 and 31 the kernels of low 
specific gravity have in each case a higher percentage of both total 
and proteid nitrogen than have the kernels of high specific gravity. 
It will also be noticed that the percentage of nonproteid nitrogen is 
greater in the kernels of low specific gravity. 

Samples of wheat were also divided into light and heavy portions 

by means of a machine which operates by directing upward a current 

of air, the velocity of which can be regulated. Into this current the 

grain is directed. The result is that the heavy kernels and the large 

27889— No. 78—05 4 49 



50 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



kernels fall, and the light kernels and small kernels are driven out. 
The separation thus accomplished is somewhat different from that 
effected by a solution, the difference being that the latter separates 
the kernels entirely according to their specific gravities while with 
the air blast a large kernel of a certain specific gravity might descend 
with the heavy kernels, when if it were smaller, although of the same 
specific gravity, it would be blown out. 

The number of light kernels that descend on account of their large 
size is relatively small, owing to the fact that large kernels are, as a 
rule, of higher specific gravity than small ones. The following test 
was made to determine the relation between the size of wheat ker- 
nels and their specific gravity. An average lot of wheat was nearly 
equally divided by means of two sieves into three portions represent- 
ing medium, small, and large kernels. Each of these portions was 
then thrown upon solutions of the same specific gravity, and the pro- 
portion by weight that floated, or light seed, and the proportion that 
sank, or heavy seed, were determined. 

Table 2. — Proportion of light and of heavy seed. 





Kind of seed. 


Heavy seed Light seed 


Ratio. 




(grams) . 


(grams) . 


Heavy. 


Light. 


Small 


8.72 
9.62 
11.96 


11.28 
10.78 
8.04 


1 
1 

1 


1.29 




1.12 




.67 







The weight of light kernels among the small was nearly twice that 
of light kernels among the large seeds. 

Analyses of samples of wheat separated by this machine into light 
and heavy kernels gave about the same results as the samples sepa- 
rated by solutions of certain specific gravities. 

Table 3. — Analyses of large, heavy kernels and of small, light kernels. 



Serial number. 



Relative 

weight. 



Percentage of- 



Total 
nitrogen. 



Proteid 
nitrogen. 



Nonpro- 

teid 
nitrogen 



Name of variety and year of 
growth. 



10. 
57. 
58. 
65. 
66. 
80. 
81. 
383 
384 
385 
386 
602 
603 
613 
612 



Light. 
Heavy 
Light. 
Heavy 
Light. 
Heavy 
Light. 
Heavv 
Light. 
Heavy 
Light. 
Heavy 
Light. 
Heavy 
Light. 
Heavy 



2.99 
2.76 
2.77 
2.70 
2.91 
2.65 
2.45 
2.19 
3.12 
3.02 
3.13 
2.95 
3.30 
2.46 
2.35 
2.11 



2.21 
2.04 
2.11 
2.04 
2.29 
2.04 
2.00 
1.96 
■A. 10 
2.93 
2.82 
2.65 
3.06 
2.24 
2.13 
1.94 



0.78 I) Spring wheat. Marvel, grown 
.72 J in 1896. 

•55 llcurrell, grown in 1898. 
• 66 j | 

62 'l 

61 fSpring wheat, grown in 1898. 

-; 1 ;.! j Big Frame, grown in 1899. 
•jjjj [Turkish Red, grown in 1900. 

"oq Big Frame, grown in 1900. 

04 I 
"29 >Big Frame, grown in 1901. 

oo i 
"ty ^Turkish Red, grown in 1901. 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 51 

It thus becomes very apparent that the percentage of nitrogen is 
relatively greater in the light wheat selected in the manner described. 

It is well known that immature wheat is of lighter weight than 
mature wheat and that it contains a greater percentage of nonproteid 
nitrogen. In a field of wheat there are always certain plants that 
mature early, others that mature late, and some that never reach a 
normal state of maturity. The last condition is very likely to occur 
in a region of limited rainfall and intense summer heat. The con- 
ditions most favorable for the filling out of the grain are shown to be 
an abundance of soil moisture and a fair degree of warmth. The 
more nearly the conditions are the reverse of this the more shriveled 
the kernel and the lighter the weight. In the same variety and in 
the same field there are kernels that are small and shriveled because 
of immaturity, disease, or lack of nutriment. All of these classes 
would appear among the "light" kernels separated in this way. 

In order to approach the question from another standpoint, a num- 
ber of spikes of wheat of the Turkish Red variety were selected in the 
field, care being taken that all were fully ripe, and that they were 
composed of healthy, well-formed kernels. These spikes were sam- 
pled by removing one row of spikelets from each spike and the kernels 
so removed were tested for moisture, proteid nitrogen, specific 
gravity, and weight of kernel, and from the last two the relative 
volume was calculated. It will be shown later that a sample taken 
in this way permits of an accurate estimation of the average com- 
position of the kernels on the spike. 

The number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the row of spikelets 
on each spike was calculated from the data mentioned, and the 
average weight of the kernels on the row of spikelets was determined 
from their total weight and number, thus permitting of the estima- 
tion of the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the average kernel 
on each spike. 

In Table 4 the spikes having a proteid nitrogen content of from 2 to 
2.5 per cent are arranged in one group, and on the same line with each 
spike are placed the number of kernels on one row of spikelets, weight 
of these kernels, weight of average kernel, relative volume of average 
kernel, specific gravity of kernel, grams of proteid nitrogen in one 
row of spikelets, and grams of proteid nitrogen in average kernel. 
Spikes having a proteid nitrogen content of from 2.5 to 3 per cent are 
similarly arranged, and so with all spikes up to 4 per cent. The aver- 
age for each group is shown in the table. 

There are, in all, 257 spikes, of which 18 have from 2 to 2.5 per cent 
proteid nitrogen, 82 from 2.5 to 3 per cent, 107 from 3 to 3.5 per cent, 
and 49 from 3.5 to 4 per cent. 



52 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of kernels. 

Crop of 1902. 



2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 





Number 
of ker- 
nels on 
row of 

spikelets. 


Weight (in grams) 






Percent- 


Proteid 


nitrogen 




of 




Volume 


Specific 


age of 


(gra 


m) in — 


Record 






of aver- 


gravity 


proteid 














number. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


age ker- 
nel. 


of ker- 
nels. 


nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


183 

188 

193 

205 


17 
16 
14 
15 


0.4772 
.4425 
.3724 
. 4824 


0.0280 
.0276 
.0266 
.0321 






2.06 
2. 37 
2.41 
2.41 


0.00983 
.01049 
.00897 
.01548 


0.000577 
.000654 
. 000642 
.000774 










0.0241 


1.3323 


291 


18 


.5221 


.0290 


. 0209 


1.3850 


2. 23 


.01616 


. 000647 


304 


21 


.5336 


.0254 


.0189 


1 . 3424 


2.24 


.01195 


.000569 


318 


22 


.6708 


.0304 


.0220 


1 . 3853 


2.02 


.01354 


.000614 


347 


15 


. 4549 


.0303 


.0216 


1.4031 


2.44 


.01110 


.000739 


357 


15 


. 4063 


.0270 


.0192 


1.4074 


2.36 


.00959 


.000637 


358 


21 


.6689 


.0318 


.0235 


1.3544 


2.33 


.01559 


. 000742 


380 


14 


.4336 


.0309 


.0225 


1.3735 


2.35 


.01019 


. 000726 


396 


19 


.4787 


.0251 


.0183 


1.3680 


2. 28 


.01091 


. 000572 


402 


17 


.4594 


. 0258 


.0188 


1.3718 


2.33 


. 01070 


.000601 


406 


21 


.5878 


.0279 


.0200 


1.3915 


2.44 


.01434 


.000681 


415 

440 

444 

445 

Average... 


13 
17 
16 
16 


.2771 
.4566 
.4110 
.4318 


.0213 
.0268 
. 0256 
.0269 






2.44 
2.36 
2.38 
2.37 


. 00676 
.0107S 
.00978 
.01023 


.000520 
. 000632 
.000609 

.000638 


















17 


.4759 


.0266 


. 0209 


1.374 


2.323 


.01141 


.000643 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



181 


19 


0.4482 


0. 0235 






2.66 


0.01192 


0.000625 


182 

185 

187 

189 

196 

197 

199 


17 
19 

15 
is 
17 
20 
17 


.4299 
.5041 
.3945 

.4871 
.4995 
.5683 
.4589 


. 0252 
.0265 
.0263 
.0270 
.0293 
.0284 
.0269 






2.76 
2.71 
2.99 
2.64 

2.71 
2.85 
2.99 


.01187 
. 01366 

.01 ISO 

. 01286 
.01354 
. 01620 
.01372 


.000696 
.000718 
.000786 
.000713 
. 000794 
. 000809 
.000804 




















207 


15 


.4584 


. 0305 


0. 0230 


1.3248 


2.73 


.01709 


. 000833 


210 


14 


. 3955 


.0282 


.0288 


1.2363 


2.95 


.01167 


. 000832 


211 


17 


.5211 


.0306 


. 0228 


• 1.3416 


2.90 


.01511 


.000887 


212 


15 


.4298 


.0286 


.0211 


1.3537 


2.97 


.01277 


. 000849 


217 


18 


.6299 


.0349 


.0259 


1.3461 


2.86' 


.01802 


.000998 


218 


18 


.5130 


.0285 


.0214 


1.3303 


2.58 


.01324 


.(KKI735 


219 


19 


.3862 


.0203 


.0157 


1.2950 


2.71 


. 01047 


.000550 


222 


19 


.4611 


. 0242 


.0182 


1.3331 


2.93 


.01351 


. 000709 


227 


19 


.5581 


.0293 


.0214 


1.3704 


2. 71 


.01624 


. 000794 


229 


17 


. 4849 


.0285 


.0206 


L.3856 


2.96 


.01387 


.000844 


230 


15 


.4867 


.0324 


.0234 


1.3815 


2.54 


.01236 


. 000823 


238 


17 


.5166 


.0303 


. 0220 


1 . 3794 


2.70 


.01395 


. 00u818 


239 


17 


.3910 


.0230 


.01649 


1.3941 


2.60 


.01017 


.000598 


241 


18 


. 1230 


.0235 


.0178 


1.3196 


2. 76 


.01168 


. 000o49 


242 


18 


. 1562 


.0253 


-.0184 


1.3753 


2.96 


.01350 


.000749 


252 


19 


.4898 


. 02578 


.0186 


1.3875 


2.55 


.01249 


. 000o55 


277 


14 


.3792 


.0270 


.0203 


1.3286 


2.86 


.01085 


.OOu772 


288 


17 


.4956 


.0291 


.0217 


1.3428 


2.82 


.01398 


.000821 


289 


19 


. 5042 


.0265 


.0187 


1.4155 


2.53 


.01276 


. 000670 


293 


17 


.4858 


.0285 


.0206 


1.3835 


2.64 


.01283 


.000752 


294 


19 


.4173 


.0219 


.0159 


1.3813 


2.56 


.01068 


.000561 


302 


22 
19 


.5569 
.4922 


.0253 
.0258 


.0190 

.0185 


1.3312 

1.3996 


2.68 
2.51 


.01437 
. 01235 


.000678 
. 000650 


306 


308 


15 


. 4951 


.0330 


.0237 


1.392 


2.85 


.01411 


.000941 


315 


16 


.4994 


.0312 


.0224 


1.3916 


2.75 


.01373 


.000858 


319... 


17 

18 


. 4644 
. 5668 


.0273 
.0314 


.0203 

.0229 


1.3447 

1.3710 


2.86 
2.98 


.01328 
.01689 


. 000781 
. 000938 


320 


322 


Hi 


.5107 


.0219 


.02311 


1 . 352 


2.55 


.01302 


.000813 


329 


12 


.3903 


. 0325 


. 0234 


1.3911 


2.88 


.01241 


.000936 


330 


17 


.3431 


.0201 


.0161 


1.2498 


2.62 


.00899 


. 000527 


332 


16 


.4847 


.0302 


.0218 


1.3879 


2.58 


.01251 


.000779 


334 


18 


.5399 


.0299 


.0215 


1.3922 


2.62 


.01415 


. 000783 


335 


18 


. 6474 


.0359 


.0258 


1 . 3928 


2.82 


.01826 


.001012 


337 


15 


.4497 


.0299 


.0215 


1.3877 


2.89 


. 01345 


. 000864 


340 


20 


.4155 


.0207 


.0153 


1.3550 


2.74 


.01138 


. 000567 


341 


15 


.5058 


.0337 


.0213 


1.3890 


2.97 


.01502 


.001001. 


342 


14 


.4486 


.0320 


.0228 


1.4037 


2.60 


.01166 


.000832 


343 


13 


.4112 


.0316 


.0224 


1.4107 


2.50 


.01028 


.000791 


344 


16 


. 4004 


.0250 


.0184 


1.3611 


2.93 


.01173 


. 000733 


345 


18 


.5422 


.0301 


.0216 


1.3919 


2.56 


.01388 


. 000771 


346 


19 


. 6393 


.0336 


.0242 


1.3913 


2. 55 


.01630 


.01X1857 


348 


18 


.6328 


.0351 


.0262 


1.3415 


2.88 


.01822 


.001010 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



53 



Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of kernels. 

Crop of 1902— Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 







Weight (ingrains) 






Percent- 


Proteid 


1 
nitrogen 




Number 
of ker- 
nels on 
row of 

spikelets. 


of 




Volume 


Specific 


age of 


(gram) in 


Record 







of aver- 


gravity 


proteid 










number. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


age ker- 
nel. 


of ker- 
nels. 


nil n gen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


349 


17 


0. 1573 


0.0269 


0.0195 


1.3822 


2.66 


0.01210 


0.000716 


350 


16 


.4437 


.0277 


.0199 


1.3891 


2.64 


.01171 


.000731 


354 


21 


.6386 


.0304 


.0217 


1 . 4002 


2.73 


.01743 


.000830 


355 


16 


.5008 


.0313 


.0223 


1.4022 


2.84 


.01 122 


.OOOSS9 


356 


19 


.5304 


.0279 


.0200 


1.390 


2.91 


.01543 


.000812 


359 


15 


.3882 


.0259 


.0186 


1.3915 


2.97 


.01153 


.000769 


360 


24 


.6375 


.0265 


.0191 


1.3840 


2.89 


.01S42 


.000766 


361 


14 


.32! 17 


. 0235 


.0170 


1.3819 


2.94 


. 00969 


.000691 


364 


18 


. 4724 


.0262 


.0191 


1.3729 


2.92 


.01379 


.000765 


371 


18 


. 5695 


.0316 


.0227 


1.3906 


2.99 


.01703 


.000945 


373 


18 


.5861 


.0325 


.0235 


1.3838 


2.87 


.01682 


.000933 


376 


12 


. 2677 


.0223 


.0162 


1 . 3747 


2.60 


.00696 


.000580 


378 


14 


.4099 


.0292 


.0212 


1.3761 


2.75 


.01127 


.000803 


383 


12 


.3416 


.0284 


.0206 


1.3771 


2.96 


.01011 


.000841 


386 


16 


.4921 


. 0307 


.0223 


1.3741 


2. 52 


.01240 


.000774 


387 


19 


.5177 


.0272 


.0198 


1.3758 


2.73 


.01413 


.000743 


389 


21 


.5830 


.0277 


.0201 


1.3569 


2.96 


.01726 


.000820 


392 


16 


. 3547 


.0221 


.0171 


1.2947 


2.94 


.01043 


.000650 


393 


15 


.3494 


.0232 


.0165 


1.4070 


2.70 


.00943 


. 000626 


394 


16 


.3897 


.0243 


.0180 


1.3508 


2.77 


.01079 


. 000673 


395 


17 


.4805 


.0282 


.0206 


1.3693 


2.98 


.01432 


.000840 


419 


14 
15 
18 
17 
18 
16 
22 
23 
18 
19 
13 


.3448 

.3097 
.4991 
.4635 
.5714 
. 4621 
.6138 
.6997 
.5600 
.5327 
.4131 


.0246 

.02011 
.0277 
.0272 
.0317 
.0289 
.0270 
.0304 
.0311 
.0280 
.0317 






2.86 
2.53 
2. 62 
2.60 
2. 82 
2.86 
2.88 
2. 67 
2.98 
2.93 
2.51 


.00! ISO 

.00784 
.01308 
.01205 
.01611 
.01322 
.01768 
.01868 
.01669 
.01561 
.01037 


. 000704 
.000521 
.000726 

. 000707 
.000894 
.000827 
. 000834 
.000812 
.000927 
.000820 
.000796 


421 

424 

428 














430 

434 

436 

438 

439 

441 

443 

Average... 




































17.07 


.4791 


.0279 


.0207 


1.3680 


2.76 


.01332 


.000776 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



173 

175 

176 

190 

191 

192 

194 

195 


20 
21 
20 
18 
17 
17 
13 
19 
18 
18 
14 


0.5913 

. 5773 
.5804 
. 4673 
. 1279 
.4126 
.3218 
.4924 
.4683 
.5764 
.3824 


0.0295 
.0274 
.0290 
.0259 
.0251 
.0242 
. 0247 
.0259 
.0260 
.0320 
.0273 






3. OS 
3.46 
3. 10 
3.25 
3.25 
3.12 
3.43 
3.33 
3. is 
3.24 
3.13 


0.01821 
.01997 
.01799 
.01519 
.01091 
.01287 
.01104 
.01640 
.01489 
.01 sos 
.01197 


0.000909 
.(XI0948 
. 000899 
.000842 
.000816 
.000755 
. 000847 
.000862 
.000827 
.001040 
.0008.54 






























198 

200 

202 










0.0200 


1.3615 


203 


16 


.5251 


.0328 


.0241 


1.3614 


3.07 


.01612 


.001007 


206 


17 
19 


.3392 
. 4939 


.0199 

.0259 


.0157 
.0192 


1.2709 
1.3494 


3.44 

3.21 


.01166 
.01585 


.000685 
. 000831 


208 


213 


15 


.4116 


.0274 


.0204 


1.3415 


3.31 


.01362 


.000907 


214 


16 


.4371 


.0273 


.0208 


I.30S2 


3.09 


.01351 


.000844 


216 


15 


.3122 


.0208 


.0165 


1.2588 


3.33 


.01040 


.000693 


220 


17 


.5040 


.0296 


.0222 


1.3350 


3.20 


.01613 


. 000947 


223 


17 


.4 7! 15 


.0282 


.0204 


1.3970 


3.31 


.01587 


.000933 


226 


21 


.5380 


.0256 


.0170 


1.4951 


3.11 


.01673 


.000796 


228 


14 


.4143 


.0295 


.0211 


1 . 3945 


3.40 


.01409 


.001003 


231 


18 


.5888 


.0327 


.0242 


1.3511 


3.11 


.01831 


.001017 


232 


13 


.3825 


.0294 


.0221 


1.3280 


3.11 


.01190 


.000914 


233 


17 


.5331 


.0313 


.0231 


1.3558 


3.32 


.01663 


. 001039 


234 


16 


.5201 


.0325 


.0243 


1.3363 


3.23 


.01680 


.001050 


230 


25 


.7451 


.0298 


.0220 


1 . 3504 


3.19 


.02377 


.000951 


243 


24 


.6349 


.0264 


.0196 


1.34S7 


3.47 


. 02203 


.000916 


214 


19 


.5839 


.0307 


.0214 


1.4305 


3. 30 


.01927 


.001013 


249 


16 


.4415 


.0275 


.0199 


1.3850 


3.21 


.01417 


.01 ioss:; 


250 


15 


.4514 


.0300 


.0213 


1.4100 


3.12 


.01408 


. 000936 


251 


22 


.0100 


.0281 


.0203 


1.3823 


3.46 


.02142 


.000972 


255 


18 


.5948 


.0330 


.0233 


1.4146 


3.03 


.01802 


.001000 


256 


21 


.5277 


.0251 


.0184 


1.3629 


3.31 


.01747 


.000832 


258 


17 


.4703 


.0276 


.0211 


1.3065 


3.38 


- .01590 


. 000933 



54 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of "kernels. 

Crop of 1 902— Continued.' 

3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 







Weight (in grams) 






Percent- 


Proteid 


nitrogen 


Record 


Number 
of ker- 


of- 




Volume 
of aver- 


Specific 
gravity 


age of 
proteid 


(gram) in— 


nels on 

row of 

spikelets. 










number. 


Kemels. 


Average 
kernel. 


age ker- 
nel. 


of ker- 
nels. 


nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average, 
kernel. 


262 


18 


0. 4604 


0. 0255 


0.0193 


1.3216 


3.20 


0.01473 


0.000816 


263 


18 


..-,114(1 


.0280 


.0197 


1.4206 


3.24 


.01633 


.000907 


261 


18 


.4138 


.0229 


.0169 


1.3544 


3.37 


.01395 


. 000772 


265 


18 


. 4429 


.0246 


.0189 


1.3005 


3.30 


.01462 


.000812 


266 


19 


. 5010 


.0263 


.0187 


1.4090 


3.11 


.01558 


.000818 


269 


17 


.4531 


.0266 


.0209 


1 . 2748 


3.21 


.01454 


.000854 


270 


20 


.5183 


.0259 


.0191 


1.3541 


3.37 


.01747 


.000873 


271 


14 


. 3275 


.0233 


.0177 


1.3143 


3.39 


.01110 


. 000790 


272 


15 


.3858 


.0257 


.0190 


1 . 3564 


3.14 


.01212 


.000807 


273 


IN 


.4559 


.0253 


.0178 


1.4228 


3.39 


.01546 


.000858 


275 


18 


. 4862 


.0270 


.0197 


1.3711 


3.33 


.01619 


. 000899 


276 


15 


.3973 


.0264 


.0191 


1.3815 


3.15 


.01251 


. 000832 


278 


15 


.4715 


.0314 


.0226 


1.3903 


3.12 


.01471 


. 000980 


281 


21 


. 6938 


.0330 


.0241 


1.3693 


3.26 


.02262 


.001076 


282 


18 


.4973 


.0276 


.0200 


1.3795 


3.02 


.01502 


. 000834 


295 


19 


. 5205 


.0273 


.0201 


1.3608 


3.06 


.01593 


.000835 


300 


19 


.4994 


.0262 


.0188 


1.3945 


3.07 


.01533 


.000894 


301 


16 


. 5492 


. 0343 


.0249 


1.3787 


3.09 


.01697 


.001060 


305 


13 


.3452 


.0265 


.0197 


1.3432 


3.07 


.01060 


.000814 


307 


20 


.4122 


.0206 


.0140 


1 . 4727 


3. 19 


.01315 


.000657 


310 


18 


.4867 


.0270 


.0198 


1.36X1 


3.16 


. 01538 


.000853 


312 


15 


.4324 


.0288 


.0210 


L.3718 


3.49 


.01509 


.001005 


314 


15 


.4122 


.0274 


.0201 


1.3657 


3.16 


.01303 


.000866 


316 


17 


.4157 


.0244 


.0178 


1.3733 


3.36 


.01397 


.000820 


317 


17 


.4412 


.0259 


.0193 


1.3424 


3.43 


.01513 


.000888 


321 


18 


.54S4 


.0304 


.0207 


1.4660 


3.43 


.01881 


.001043 


323 


17 


.4075 


.0239 


.0177 


1.3487 


3.43 


.01398 


.000820 


324 


17 


.4230 


.0248 


.0180 


1.3740 


3.19 


.01319 


.000791 


325 


17 


.5110 


.0300 


.0220 


1.3658 


3.46 


.01768 


. 001038 


327 


16 


. 4039 


. 0252 


.0191 


1.3225 


3.45 


.01393 


.000869 


333 


16 


.4610 


. 0288 


.0206 


1.3956 


3.26 


.01503 


. 000939 


336 


13 


.3637 


.0279 


.0198 


1.41o2 


3.36 


.01222 


.000937 


339 


16 


. 3803 


.0237 


.0171 


1.3828 


3.33 


.01266 


.000789 


351 


15 


.3843 


.0256 


.0186 


1.3812 


3.32 


.01276 


.000851 


352 


15 


.4497 


.0299 


.0217 


1.38^9 


3.05 


.01372 


.000914 


. 353 


16 


.4726 


.0295 


.0211 


1.3988 


3.11 


. 01470 


.000917 


362 


19 


.5258 


. 0276 


.0201 


1.3 7 01 


3.03 


.01593 


. 000836 


366 


17 


.4214 


.0247 


.0185 


1.3350 


3.17 


. 01336 


.000783 


367 


20 


.5351 


.0267 


.0197 


1.3555 


3.37 


.01803 


. 000900 


368 


19 


.3877 


.0204 


.0151 


1.3497 


3.06 


.01186 


.000(124 


369 


19 


.5560 


.0292 


.0214 


1.3621 


3.34 


.01857 


.000975 


370 


17 


.4200 


.0247 


.0180 


1.3735 


3.09 


.01298 


. 000763 


372 


17 


.4811 


.0283 


.0206 


1.3714 


3.31 


.01593 


. 000937 


374 


17 


. 5249 


.0308 


.0218 


1.4142 


3.15 


.01653 


.000970 


375 


18 


. 5147 


.0285 


.0203 


1.4018 


3.41 


.01755 


.000975 


377 


14 


.3173 


.0226 


.0174 


1.3013 


3.47 


.01101 


.000784 


379 


is 


. 5271 


.0292 


.0213 


1.3703 


3.09 


.01629 


. 000902 


381 


13 


.3506 


.0269 


.0199 


1.3544 


3.45 


.01210 


. (100928 


382 


19 


. 5057 


.0266 


.0194 


1 . 3728 


3.23 


.01633 


.000859 


388 


19 


.5799 


.0305 


. 0221 


1 . 3773 


3.05 


.01769 


.000930 


390 


19 


.4764 


. 0250 


.0181 


L.3806 


3.22 


.01534 


.000805 


391 


18 


.4474 


.0248 


.0182 


1 . 3628 


3.26 


.01459 


. 000808 


399 .. 


12 
20 


.3058 
.5720 


.0254 
.0286 


.0188 
.0206 


1.3510 
1.3837 


3.10 
3.35 


. 00948 
.01916 


. 000787 

.000958 


400 


401 


16 


.3996 


.0249 


.0183 


1.3575 


3.37 


.01347 


. 000839 


403 


17 


. 5000 


.0294 


.0211 


1.3927 


3.04 


.01520 


.000894 


404 


18 


. 4286 


.0238 


.0180 


1.3221 


3.30 


.01414 


. 000785 


410 

411 

414 

416 

418 

423 

425 

426 

427 

429 

431 

432 

433 

437 

442 

Average . . 


20 
14 
19 
15 
21 
18 
16 
18 
19 
20 
18 
21 
20 
16 
17 


.5368 
. 3479 
..5044 
.4269 
.4995 
.4845 
.4801 
.5166 
.5433 
.4701 
.4119 
. 6306 
.5206 
.4336 
.3889 


.0268 
.0248 
.0265 
.0284 
.0237 
.0269 
.0300 
.0287 
.0285 
.0235 
.0228 
.0300 
.0260 
.0271 
. 0228 






3.27 
3.15 
3.14 
3.24 

3.05 
3.14 
3.30 
3.09 
3.06 
3.04 
3.20 
3.00 
3.12 
3.13 
3.23 


.01755 
.01096 
.01584 
.01383 
. 01523 
.01521 
.01584 
. 01596 
.01662 
. 01430 
.01318 
.(US'. 12 
.01624 
.01357 
.01256 


.000780 

. 000781 
.000832 
.000920 
.000723 
.000845 
. 000990 
.000887 
. 000872 
.000714 
. 000732 
.000900 

.000811 
. 000848 

. 000736 






























































17.4 


.4724 


.0270 


.0199 


1.3666 


3.23 


.01520 


.OOIIS71 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



55 



Table 4. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content of Jcernels, 

Crop of 1902 — Continued. 



3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 





Number 
of ker- 


Weight ( 


in grams) 






Percent- 


Proteid 


nil rogen 


Record 


ot— 


Volume 
of aver- 


Specific 
gravity 


age of 
proteid 


(gram) in— 


nels Oil 

row of 

spikelets. 










number. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


age ker- 
nel 


of ker- 
nels. 


nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


174 

177 

179 

180 

184 

186 

204 


18 
19 
19 
17 
20 
21 
15 


0. 4025 
. 4073 
. 4972 
.5262 
.5512 
. 54 1 1 
.4015 


0. 0223 
.0214 
.0261 
.0309 
.0275 
.0257 
.0267 






3. 76 
3. 57 
3.85 
3.58 
3.78 
3.97 
3.90 


0.01513 
.01454 
.01914 
.01884 
. 02084 
.02119 
.01566 


0. 1X10838 
.000764 

.001005 
.001110 
.001040 
.001020 
.001043 






















0.0198 


1.3460 


209 


17 


.3588 


.0211 


.0164 


1 . 2828 


3.82 


.01371 


.000806 


215 


12 


.3318 


.0276 


. 0205 


1.3493 


3.79 


.01258 


.001046 




17 


.4891 


.0287 


.0220 


1. 3039 


3.65 


.01785 


.001048 




19 


.4976 


.0261 


.0193 


1.3507 


3.55 


.01766 


.ooi it t2 7 


235 


18 


. 1555 


.0253 


.0192 


1.3164 


3.65 


.01663 


.000923 


240 


16 


.3984 


. 0249 


.0177 


1.4025 


3.53 


.01406 


.000879 


245 


15 


.3971 


.0264 


. 0200 


1.3230 


3.64 


.01445 


.000961 


246 


18 


. 4562 


. 0253 


.0194 


1.3058 


3.75 


.01711 


. 000949 


247 


18 


. 41137 


. 0274 


.11202 


1.3561 


3.50 


.01728 


.000! I.V.I 


248 


17 


.4617 


.0271 


.0193 


1.4095 


3.65 


.01685 


.000991 


253 


21 


. 5960 


. 02S3 


. 0203 


1.3917 


3.63 


.02163 


.001327 


259 


19 


.4932 


. 0259 


.0193 


1.3400 


3.84 


.01894 


.000995 


261 


17 


.5195 


. 0305 


.0229 


1.3333 


3.50 


.01818 


.001068 


274 


15 


.3347 


.0223 


.0168 


1.3300 


3.57 


.01195 


.000796 


279 


16 


.4304 


.0269 


.0200 


1.3441 


3.79 


.01631 


. 001020 


280 


16 


. 4305 


. 0269 


.0198 


1.3600 


3.70 


. 01593 


.000995 


283.. 


17 


.4974 


.0292 


.0210 


1.3911 


3.86 


.01920 


.001127 


284 


14 


.3723 


.0265 


.0189 


1.4050 


3.72 


.01385 


.000986 


285 


18 


.5769 


. 0320 


.0233 


1.3715 


3.87 


.02233 


.001238 


286 


17 

16 


.4140 
.4740 


.0243 
.0296 


.0178 
.0223 


1.3660 
1.3270 


3.56 
3.87 


.01474 
.01835 


.0O0S65 
.001146 


287. 


290 


16 


.3955 


. 0247 


.0177 


1.3921 


4.00 


.01582 


.000988 


296 . . . 


17 


. 5037 


.0296 


.0214 


1.3832 


3.94 


. 01985 


.001166 


299 


17 


. 4553 


.0267 


.0195 


1.3715 


3.68 


. 01676 


.000983 


309 


18 


. 4753 


.0239 


.0239 


1.1051 


3.75 


.01782 


.000990 


313 


17 


.4798 


.0282 


.0202 


1.3971 


3.52 


.01689 


. 000993 




20 


. 5795 


.0289 


.0215 


1.3466 


3.61 


.02092 


.001043 


363 


17 


. 3795 


.0223 


.0165 


1.3499 


3.50 


.01328 


.000781 


365 


16 


.3469 


.0216 


.0169 


1.2787 


3.50 


.01214 


.000756 


384 


14 


.4012 


.0286 


.0212 


1.3499 


3.56 


. 01428 


.001020 


385 


15 


.4162 


.0277 


.0203 


1.3670 


3.79 


.01578 


.001050 


405 


18 


.4940 


.0274 


.0203 


1.3508 


3.76 


.01857 


. 001030 


407 


20 


.4707 


.0235 


.0171 


1.3700 


3.79 


.01784 


.000891 


408 

409 

412 

413 

417 

420 

422 

435 

446 

Average . . 


19 

17 
16 
17 
19 
17 
23 
20 
17 


.4462 
.4329 
.3390 
.4393 
.4530 
.4156 
.5395 
. 4310 
.4425 


. 0234 
. 0254 
.0211 
.0258 
. 0238 
. 0244 
.0234 
.0215 
. 0260 






3.64 
3.59 
3.63 
3.77 
3.80 
3.73 
3.53 
3.53 
3.75 


.01624 
.01554 
.01231 
.01656 
.01721 
. 01550 
.01904 
.01521 
.01659 


.000852 
.000912 
.000766 
. 000973 
. 000904 
.000910 
. 000826 
.000759 
.000975 






































17.3 


.4517 


.0257 


.01987 


1.3494 


3.70 


.01672 


.000982 



Table 5 shows at a glance the averages for each of the classes of 
spikes just tabulated, and permits of a comparison of the average 
figures for each class." 

" The determinations of specific gravity were made by the following method, devised by 
Prof. S. Avery: A light basket of wire gauze was suspended by a hair from the hook that 
supported one of the pan hangers of the balance. The basket was allowed to hang in a 
beaker of benzol supported by a shelf above the pan. By using a counterpoise the balance 
was now brought to the zero point. The balance was kept at zero by the occasional adjust- 
ment of a rider on the left arm of the beam. The wheat was weighed on the pan of the 
balance, then transferred to the basket and weighed in benzol, and the temperature of the 
latter carefully noted. The specific gravity was calculated from the well-known formula: 
Wt. in air X sp. gr. in benzol at T" _ o 
Wt. in air — wt. in benzol 



56 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 5. — Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to nitrogen content 

of kernels. Crop of 1902. 



Range of 


Per- 
centage 
of pro- 
teid 

nitro- 
gen in 
kernels. 


Number of — 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Volume 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


Specific 
gravity. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 


percentage ol 

proteid 

nitrogen. 


Analy- 
ses. 


Kernels 
on row 
of spike- 
lets. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


2 to 2 5 

2.5 to 3 

3.5to 1 


2. 32 
2. 76 

3.23 
3.70 


18 
82 
107 
49 


17 
17.1 
17.4 
17.3 


0.4759 

.471)1 
. 4724 
.4715 


0. 0266 
.0279 
.0270 
.0257 


0. 0209 
.0207 
.0199 

.0199 


1.374 
1.368 
1.367 
1.349 


0.01141 

.01332 
.01520 

.01672 


0. 000643 
.000776 
.000874 
.000982 



From this table it will be seen that with an increase in the percent- 
age of proteid nitrogen the number of kernels on a row of spikelets 
remains about constant ; that in general there were a decrease in the 
weight of the kernels on a row of spikelets and a slight decrease in the 
weight of the average kernel; and that the volume of the average 
kernel decreased, as did the specific gravity. 

It may safely be stated that a high percentage of proteid nitrogen 
was in these spikes associated with a kernel of low 7 specific gravity, 
light weight, and small relative volume, and, as the spikes were 
selected for their ripeness and healthy appearance, this relation can 
not be attributed to immaturity or disease. 

The table last referred to shows a decrease in the weight of the 
kernels on the spike as the percentage of proteid nitrogen increases; 
but it also shows that in spite of the decrease in the weight of the 
kernels there is an increase in the actual amount of proteid nitrogen 
they contain, and that the same is true of the average kernel. 

Table 6 gives a summary of the same analyses, arranged according 
to the specific gravities of the kernels. All spikes whose kernels had 
a specific gravity below 1.30 are grouped in one class, those having a 
specific gravity of 1.30 to 1.33 in another class, and so on until finally 
all spikes having a specific gravity of more than 1.42 form the last 
class. 

Table 6.; — Summary of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to specific gravities 

of kermis. Crop of 1.902. 



Range of specific 
gravity. 


Specific 

gravity 
of ker- 
nels. 


Number cf — 


Weight 

of kernels 

(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Weight 
of aver- 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Analy- 
ses. 


Kernels. 


age 

kerne! 
(gram). 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


Below 1.30 


1.255 

1.315 

1.347 

1.375- 

1.399 

1.463 


8 
17 
50 
71 
40 

8 


16.7 
16.5 
17.3 
17.2 
16.7 
19.1 


0. 3887 
.4315 
.4008 
,4794 

.4848 
.5287 


3.29 
3.35 
2.91 
3.06 
3.03 
3.07 


0.02331 
.02617 
. 02366 
. 02786 
.02899 
. 02773 


0. 01280 
.01446 


0. 0007662 


I 30 to 1 33 


.0008762 


1.33 to 1.36 


.01508 .0008756 


1 36 to 1 39... 


.01462 .0008559 


1 39 to 1.42... 


.01459 .01108729 


1.42 and over 


.01605 


.0008371 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL 



57 



This table shows no constant relation between the specific gravity 
and the number of kernels on the spike. With an increase in the 
specific gravity there is an increase in the weight of the kernels on the 
spike, and with some exceptions an increase in the weight of the 
average kernel. As the specific gravity increases, the percentage of 
proteid nitrogen decreases, which agrees with the previous table. 
The grams of proteid nitrogen in the kernels on the spikes and in the 
average kernel increase with the specific gravity. 

Table 7 shows the summary of the same analyses, arranged accord- 
ing to the weight of the average kernel. Spikes whose kernels have 
an average weight of less than 0.024 gram form the first class, and 
each succeeding class increases by 0.002 gram. 

Table 7.Summaru of analyses of spikes of wheat, arranged according to weight of average 

Tcernel. Crop of 1902. 



Range of weight of 
average kernel 

(gram). 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 


Number of— 


Weight 


Specific 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Analy- Kernels . 

ses. 


nels of ker- 
(gram). nels. 


SEP K — ls - 


Below 0.024 


0.02214 
.02528 
.02705 

. 02890 
.03089 
. 03324 


27 16.9 
38 : 17.5 

48 17.0 
40 | 17.(1 
.v, 17.0 
19 16.8 


0.3812 
. 4425 
.4609 
.4916 
. 5274 
.558S 


1.341 
1.361 
1.360 

1.372 
1.388 
1.373 


3.197 

3.28 

3.22 

3.11 

2.86 

2.88 


0.0007184 
.0008294 
.0008711 
.0009090 

.IKKI.S7S7 
.0009594 


0.01215 


0.024 to 0.026 

0.026 to 0.028 

0.028 to 0.030 

0.030 to 0.032 

0.032 and over 


.01438 
.01475 
.01546 
.oi.-,oi; 
.01617 



There seems to be no relation between the weight of the average 
kernel and the number of kernels on the spike. The weight of all 
the kernels on the spike naturally increases with the weight of the 
average kernel. The specific gravity of the kernels increases with 
the weight of the average kernel. The percentage of proteid nitrogen 
decreases with an increase in the weight of the average kernel, in 
which respect it agrees with the two previous tables. The grams of 
proteid nitrogen in the average kernel and the total proteid nitrogen 
in the spike increase with the weight of the average kernel. 

Samples from each of the spikes of wheat from which these data 
were derived were planted, together with samples from other spikes, 
all of which have been analyzed, aggregating 800 in all. Each kernel 
was planted separately at a distance of 6 inches each way from every 
other kernel. The kernels from each spike were marked by a stake 
bearing the record number of the spike. 

During the winter a considerable number of plants were killed, so 
that the stand was irregular in the spring. In some cases all of the 
plants resulting from a spike of the previous year were killed, and in 
other cases only a portion of such plants. The result was a some- 
what uneven stand, which doubtless gave certain plants an advantage 
over others in growth and yield. 



58 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

When the crop was ripe in 1903 each plant was harvested sepa- 
rately, and all of those resulting from spikes winch the previous year 
had shown a proteid nitrogen content of more than 4 per cent or less 
than 2 per cent were analyzed, as were also a certain number resulting 
from spikes of intermediate values. 

The good kernels on each plant w r ere counted and weighed, thus 
giving a record of the yield of each plant. From these data the 
average weight of the kernels per plant was calculated. The specific 
gravity was not determined and consequently the average volume of 
the kernels on each plant was not calculated, as was done the previous 
3^ear. 

In Table 8 the plants harvested in 1903 are arranged in classes of 
1 to 2 per cent proteid nitrogen, 2 to 2.5 per cent, 2.5 to 3 per cent, 
3 to 3.5 per cent, 3.5 to 4 per cent, 4 to 4.5 per cent, and over 4.5 per 
cent. The number and weight of the kernels on each plant are stated, 
as is also the average weight of each kernel. The number of grains 
of proteid nitrogen in all the kernels of the plant is shown, and also 
the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the average kernel on each 
plant. Table 9 shows the average for each class. 

These results, so far as they cover the same ground as those of the 
previous year, have the same significance. They show a quite uniform 
although slight decrease in the weight of the average kernel accom- 
panying an increase in the percentage of proteid nitrogen, and a very 
marked increase in the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
average kernel. Especially marked is the increase in the amount of 
proteid nitrogen in the average kernel, amounting to 28 per cent of 
the weight of the kernel for every 1 per cent increase in the content 
of proteid nitrogen. 

One column of this table, not contained in that compiled from 
results of the previous year, shows the number of grams of proteid 
nitrogen contained in all of the kernels on the plant; or, in other 
words, the proteid nitrogen production of the plant. This appears, 
on the whole, to increase with the percentage of proteid nitrogen, 
although the results are not sufficiently consistent to permit of an 
unqualified statement to that effect. The uneven stand of the plants, 
before referred to, doubtless accounts for these inconsistent results. 

Two other columns contain data not obtained in 1902. The first 
of these shows the number of kernels per plant, which apparently 
decreases slightly as the percentage of proteid nitrogen increases, but 
this can not be stated unqualifiedly. The next column shows the 
weight of kernels per plant, or the yield per plant, which likewise 
seems to decrease slightly with an increase in the percentage of pro- 
teid nitrogen. 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNKL. 



59 



Table 8. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentagt of proteid nitrogen. Crop of 

1903. 

1 TO 2 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



Record num- 
ber. 



Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in kernels, 



32206 

32605 

33407 

33408 

33905 

42206 

45606 

45805 

48407 

51005 

55307 

57308 

57405 

57607 

58806 

60605 

63505 

69806 

72606 

74305 

80305 

81705 

8171(1 

92407 

94205 

94605 

94908 

95510 

Average 



1.81 
1.20 
1.62 
1.39 
1.61 
1.46 
1.91 
1.84 
1.50 
1.34 
1.89 
1.69 
1.98 
1.73 
1.88 
1.87 
1.90 
1.66 
1.89 
1.98 
1.81 
1.98 
1.92 
L.66 
1.65 
1.95 
1.96 
1.81 



Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 



Weight (in grams) of— 



1 . 74!) 



507 
225 

305 
77 
508 
25 
220 
124 
718 
862 
342 
577 
41 
736 
95 
35 
208 
5,-i.S 
543 
216 
729 
465 
396 
53 
64 
56 
125 
159 



Kernels 
per plant. 



in. 1036 
5.2268 

7.0889 
1.1132 

11.1476 

.3161 

4.0358 

1.5298 

11.2890 

15.5935 

5.6864 

9.8378 

.8328 

16.4433 

1.9469 

. 5952 

4.0230 

12.0136 
9.3629 
4.4222 

15.7835 
9. 7922 
9.1411 
.8983 
1.2117 
.7319 
2.3678 
2. 8356 



320.3 



6. 23823 



Average 
kernel. 



Total pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram). 



Proteid 
nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 

(gram) . 



0.02052 
.02323 
.02271 

.01146 
.02194 
.01264 
.01834 
. 01234 
.01572 
. 01804 
.01663 
.01705 
.02031 
. 02234 
.02049 
.01701 
.01934 
.02153 
.01724 
.02047 
.112165 
.02106 
.02308 
.01695 
.01893 
.01307 
.01894 
.01783 



0.18831 
.06272 
.11223 
.01547 
. 17948 
.00462 
.07708 
.02815 
. 16933 
.21 ISM 
.1(1717 
. Ml .2i. 
.01649 
.24847 
. 03660 
.01113 
.07644 
. 19943 
.18538 

.0.S756 
.2851,0 
.19388 
. 17550 
.01491 
.01999 
.IH427 
.04641 
.05132 



.01871 



. 10655 



0.0003714 
.011027X8 
.0003679 
. 0002009 
.0003533 
.0001846 
. 0003504 
.0002700 
. 0002358 
. 0002422 
.0003142 
.0002S81 
.0004022 
.0003865 
.0003853 
.0003180 
.0003674 
.0003574 
.0003414 
. 0004054 
.0003919 
.0004170 
.0004432 
.0002814 
.0003124 
.0002.549 
.0003713 
. 0003228 



.00032914 



2 TO 2 5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROi.KX 



17405 
17408 

18.805 
21212 
21705 
21707 
21708 
21709 
21912 
27205 
27206 
27306 
27505 
33107 
33405 
33605 
33606 
34208 
37706 
37906 
39205 
39606 
44607 
48106 
48409 
55305 
55306 
55608 
55908 
55909 
56206 
56207 
57307 
57508 
58005 
50605 
59606 
63107 



2.13 
2.18 
2.02 
2.16 
2.45 
2.19 
2.33 
2.47 
2.31 
2.41 
2. 36 
2.47 
2.12 
2.35 
2.03 
2.39 
2.21 
2.13 
2.34 
2.44 
2.11 
2.37 
2.44 
2.38 
2.02 
2.48 
2.18 
2.31 
2.42 
2.30 
2.42 
2. 34 
2.43 
2.21 
2.43 
2.12 
2.16 
2.43 



738 
497 
137 
84 
58 
582 
390 
361 
510 
891 
. 77 
684 
539 
318 
421 
301 
382 
156 
56 
19 
1,031 
346 
101 
608 
314 
167 
214 
837 
562 
302 
509 
462 
261 
380 
170 
382 
567 
417 



15. 6996 

9. 2038 

2. 1462 

1.7216 

1.5420 

12. 3685 

9.2850 

7.7296 

9. 7236 

16. 4061 

19. 1854 

13.3011 

12. 0399 

6. 1026 

8. 1268 

7. 0596 

8.1890 

2. 9886 

1.2069 

.2063 

21.5399 

4. 6383 

1.8246 

11.6655 

6. 4302 

2. 5160 

4. 1323 

22. 5848 

12.2210 

9.2120 

9. 3093 

10. 9073 

4.7117 

12. 0728 

2. 3031 

7. 1828 

9. 7084 

9. 3120 



0.02127 
. 01852 
. 01567 
. 02050 
. 02659 
. 02125 
. 02381 
.02141 
.01907 
.01841 
.02469 
.01945 
.02183 
.01919 
. 01930 
. 02345 
.02144 
.01916 
.02155 
.01086 
. 02089 
.01341 
.01806 
.01919 
. 02048 
.01507 
.01931 
. 02699 
.02175 
. 03050 
.01829 
.02361 
.01801 
.03177 
.01355 
.01880 
.01712 
.02233 



0. 33441 
. 20065 
.04335 
.03718 
.03778 
. 27086 
. 21634 
. 19092 
. 22461 
. 39539 
. 45276 
.32X53 
. 24942 
.14341 
. 16498 
. 16872 
. 18098 
. 06366 
. 02824 
.00503 
. 45435 
. 10967 
.04452 
. 27765 
. 12989 
. 06240 

.11! .Ill IS 

. 52194 
. 29575 
.21187 
. 22529 
. 25522 
.11445 
. 26680 
. 05596 
. 15228 
. 20970 
.22628 



0.0004531 
. 0004037 
.0003164 
.0004427 
.0006514 
.0004654 
. 0005547 
. 0005289 
.0004404 
.0004437 
.0005827 
.( II K 14X03 
.0004627 
. 0004510 
.0003919 
. 0005605 
.0004738 
. 0004081 
. 0005053 
. 0002649 
. 0004407 
.0003177 
. 0004408 
. 0004567 
.0004137 
. 0003736 
. 0004210 
. 0006236 
.0005262 
.0007016 
. 0004426 
. 0005524 
. 0004387 
. 0007021 
. 0003292 
. 0003986 
. 0003698 
. 0005426 



60 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 8, 



-Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen, 
of 1903 — Continued. 



Crop 



TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in kernels. 


Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Total pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram). 


Proteid 
nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 

(gram). 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


63506 

65306 

65307 

65308 

69505 

71905 

72705 

72708 

72905 

73306 

73307 

74606 

76205 

81707 

81708 

81709 

84405 

84905 


2. 44 
2.11 
2.28 
2.09 
2.29 
2.47 
2.13 
2.27 
2. 48 
2. 15 
2.39 
2. 30 
2.35 
2.34 
2.41 
2.28 
2.48 
2.32 
2.47 
2.42 
2.30 
2.49 
2.47 
2.07 
2.35 
2.48 
2.47 


153 
544 

373 
583 
225 
1,260 
372 
398 
167 
414 

25 
464 
498 
786 
287 
757 
428 

37 

74 
470 
315 
190 
549 
419 
286 
138 

52 


2. 3986 
9.8298 

7.0051 
11.71)66 
4.7116 
28.2136 
9. 1522 
9. 0386 
2.6462 
8. 5373 
. 5572 
9. 6451 

8.4407 

18.3614 
7. 3993 

16. 4692 
8. 7148 
.7130 
1 . 5355 
9. 8719 
5.7131 
3. 6006 

10. 5556 
6. 7664 
4. 4423 
2. 9475 
.7577 


. 01568 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.01847 
.02239 
.02191 
.02270 
.01585 
. 02062 
.02229 
. 02079 
. 01695 
. 02336 
. 02578 
.02175 
.02043 
. 01927 
. 02075 
.02100 
.01814 
. 01895 
.01923 
.01615 
. 01553 
.02136 
.01457 


0. 05853 
.23690 
. 15971 
. 24468 
. 10790 
. 69688 
. 19936 
.20518 
.06563 
. 20918 
.01332 
. 22184 
. 19836 
. 42965 
.17833 
. 37548 
.21687 
.01654 
. 03793 
. 23890 
.13140 
.08965 
. 26073 
. 14007 
. 10439 
.07310 
.01872 


0. 0003825 
. 0004355 
. 0004282 

.0004197 
.0004231 
.0005531 
. 0004668 
.1111115154 
.11003930 
.110115052 
.0005327 
.0004781 
.0003983 
.0005466 
.0006213 
.0004960 
.0005067 
.0004471 
. 0005125 
. 0005082 
.0004171 
.0004719 
.0004749 
. 0003343 
. 0003650 
. 0005297 
. 0003599 


88608 

SS609 

92409 

94209 

94406 

94407 

94905 

95509 

95707 

Average 


2.319 


396.8 


8. 2502 


.020113 


. 190316 . 0004660 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17409 

17410 
20706 
20707 
20708 
20710 
21207 
21305 
21306 
21710 
21711 
21805 
21806 

21 so; 

2180,8 
21809 
21810 
21905 
22205 
22207 
25205 
25206 
26106 
26805 
26806 
26807 
26905 
26906 
26907 
26908 
26909 
27005 
27207 
27305 
27307 
27506 
27508 
27. .11! I 
28805 
32606 



2.75 
2.88 
2.78 
2. 77 
2.58 
2.83 
2.96 
2.67 
2.90 
2.59 
2.71 
2.69 
2. 71 
2. 73 
2. 57 
2.73 
2.69 
2.64 
2.81 
2.77 
2.71 
2.76 
2.63 
2.81 
2.60 
2. 80 
2. 76 
2.71 
2.61 
2.96 
2.80 
2.63 
2.92 
2.58 
2.53 
2.70 
2. 64 
2.90 
2.91 



802 
744 
163 
444 
122 
867 
118 
312 
226 

59 
873 
1,232 
599 
377 
1.156 
418 

52 
791 
283 
169 
522 
205 

90 
220 
152 
721 
326 
228 
102 
192 
180 
S66 
166 
267 
167 
444 
251 
243 

87 



14. 8957 
16. 9987 
3.3138 
9. 9070 

2. 1690 
17.1115 

2. 3066 

6. 2514 

4. 1516 

.8478 

17. 1820 

20. 9290 

14. 2450 

9.4172 

19. 7446 

8. 0214 

1.0304 

14.3111 

2.6965 

3. 2787 
10. 7836 

4. 6754 
2. 0737 
1.9456 
2. 7255 

17.2324 
6.4102 
4. 2376 
1.8276 
3. 9797 
2. 9999 

16.4120 
3. 3266 
5. 5666 
3. 0S50 

10.0005 
5. 5324 
5.3615 
2. 1851 
2.0162 



0.01857 

. 02285 
. 02033 
. 02282 
.02024 
.01 '.174 
.01955 
. 02004 
.01837 
.01437 
.01968 
.01699 
. 02378 
.02498 
.01708 
.01919 
.01982 
.01809 
.00! 153 
.01940 
. 02066 
. 02281 
. 02304 
.02248 
.0P93 
. 02390 
. 01966 
.01859 
.01792 
.02073 
.01667 
.OIS95 
.02004 
. 02085 
.01S47 
.02252 
. 02287 
. 02206 
.02512 
.02145 



0. 40964 
. 48957 
.09212 
. 27443 
. 06399 
. 48428 
. 06804 
. 16691 
. 12039 
.02196 
. 46563 
. 56299 
. 3S604 
. 25709 
. 50744 
.21898 
. 02772 
. 37781 
. 07577 
. 09082 
. 28560 
.12904 
. 05454 
. 13897 
. 07086 
. 48250 
.17692 
. 1 1484 
. 04995 
.11780 
. 08400 
.43164 
.09712 
. 14362 
.07805 
.27003 
.14608 
. 1554!) 
. 06359 
. 05807 



0.01X151 OS 
.OOO05N0 
.01105652 
.000618] 
. i ii ii 1522 1 
.0005586 
.0005766 
.0005350 
.0005327 
. 0003722 
. 0005334 
.0004569 
.0006111 
. 0006664 
. 0004389 
. 0005238 
.0005330 
. 0004777 
. 0002677 
.0005374 
.0005599 
.0006295 
. 0006060 
.00116317 
.0004662 
. 0006692 
. 0005427 
.0005037 
.0004677 
.0006135 
. 0004667 
.0004984 
.0005850 
. 0005379 
.0004674 
. 0006082 
. 0006037 
.0006399 
.1)1 107300 
.0006177 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



61 



Table 8 — Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. Crop 

of 1903— Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN-Continued. 









Weight (in grams) of— 


Total pro- Proteid 












teid nitro- nitrogen in 
gen in all average ker- 


Record num- 
ber. 


age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
n kernels. 


of ker- 
nels per 


Kernels 


Average 


i 


plant. 


per plant. 


kernel. 


(gram) . 


(gram). 


33105 


2.91 


132 


2. 5601 


0. 01939 


0. 07450 


0. 0005644 


33106 


2.94 


18 


.3089 


.01716 


.00908 .0005045 


33406 


2.87 


283 


4.6045 


. 01627 


.13215 ; .0004670 


33906 


2.81 


119 


2.2862 


.01921 


.06424 ! .0005399 


34205 


2. 73 


464 


9. 1498 


.01972 


.24979 .0005383 


34207 


2.84 


611 


13.5556 


.02219 


. 38505 . 0006273 


37305 


2.96 
2.64 


309 

461 


6. 1394 
8.0905 


.01987 
.01972 


.18173 1 .0005881 
.23998 .0005327 


37705 


37707 


2.94 


193 


3.3004 


.01710 


.09670 i .000501(1 


37905 


2.53 


37 


.9452 


.02555 


.02391 i .0006463 


38005 .. 


2.84 


139 


2.5134 


.01808 


.07138 ! .0005135 


3S506 


2.89 


85 


1.6799 


.01975 


.04855 ; .0005712 


38606 


2.63 


401 


8.4605 


.02110 


.22251 i .0005549 


38608 

38609 


2.82 
2.74 


158 
293 


3.0228 
6. 7665 


.01913 
. 02309 


. 08522 . 0005394 
.is;, in .0006475 


38706 


2.59 


365 


7. 2545 


.010SS 


.18789 1 .0005148 


39405 


2.88 


447 


9.3541 


. 02093 


.21399 


.000602/ 


39506 


2.93 


67 


1.9218 


.02869 


.05631 


. 0008404 


40505 


2.82 


170 


4. 1546 


. 02444 


.11716 


. 0006892 


43405 


2.92 


124 


2.8000 


.02258 


.08176 


. 0006594 


44505 


2.94 
2.86 


340 
55 


5.9990 
1.1271 


.01764 
. 02049 


. 17637 
.03223 


.0005187 
.0005861 


44605 


44606 


2.90 


124 


2. 5235 


.02035 


.07318 


. 0005902 


45605 


2.82 


61 


.7081 


.01161 


.01997 


. 0003273 


46106 


2.54 


82 


1.6103 


. 01964 


.04090 


. 0004988 


46107 


2.54 


478 


8.3935 


.01756 


. 21319 


. 0004460 


48305 


2.87 


473 


12.0278 


. 02543 


.34524 


. 0007299 


48408 


2.81 


27 


.3485 


.01291 


. 00979 


. 0003627 


48507 


2.64 


70 


1.6036 


. 02296 


. 04233 


. 0006062 


48508 


2.76 


603 


11.2008 


.01858 


. 30986 


.0005127 


48806 


2.70 

2.80 


547 
35 


9. 8346 
.4701 


. 01798 
. 01343 


.26553 
.01316 


. 0004877 
.0003761 


50706 


55008 


2.60 


944 


17.4226 


.01846 


.45299 


. 0004799 


55206 .. 


2.56 


578 


11.3592 


.01965 


.29079 


.0005031 


55308 


2.54 


397 


9.5078 


. 02395 


.24150 


. 0006225 


55506 


2.80 


866 


17.8506 


.02062 


. 49995 


. 0005773 


55507 


2.63 


504 


9.8228 


. 01949 


. 25834 


.0005126 


55605 


2.64 


500 


10.9180 


.02184 


. 28823 


. 0005765 


55606 


2.58 


503 


11.0930 


.02205 


. 28580 


. 0005690 


55607 


2.69 


138 


2. 3931 


.01734 


. 06437 


. 0004665 


55905 


2.67 


331 


5.7948 


.01751 


.15170 


. 0004674 


55906 


2.81 


499 


7.9968 


.01603 


.22471 


. 0004503 


55907 


2.59 


749 


19.3966 


. 02590 


. 50238 


. 0006707 


56105 


2.73 


336 


5. 7431 


.01709 


. 15679 


. 0004667 


56106 


2.57 


644 


12.0161 


.01866 


. 30881 


. 0004795 


56107 


2.96 


872 


14.4556 


.01658 


.42790 


. 0004907 


56205 


2.51 


333 


6. 5232 


.01959 


. 16373 


. 0004917 


,",6"l IS 


2.61 


563 


13.5720 


. 02356 


. 34616 


. 0006149 


56209 


2.59 


950 


15.8086 


.01664 


. 10045 


.0004310 


57005 


2.71 


88 


1 . 5364 


.01746 


.04164 


.0004731 


57006 


2.76 


701 


10. 1836 


.01453 


.28107 


. 0004010 


57007 


2.65 


168 


3.3176 


. 01975 


.08792 


. 0005233 


57105 


2.76 


407 


3.7263 


.00916 


. 10285 


. 0002527 


57306 


2.86 


434 


7.9772 


.01838 


.22815 


.0005257 


57406 


2.75 


135 


2.4923 


.01846 


.06854 


. 0005077 


57407 


2.62 


762 


14.9992 


.01968 


. 39297 


.0005157 


57408 


2.61 


596 


12. 2004 


.02047 


.31842 


. 0005343 


57506 


2.80 


180 


2. 7616 


.01534 


.07733 


. 0004296 




2.85 


359 


6.9861 


. 01946 


. 19905 


. 0005545 


57509 x 


2.54 


611 


10.6261 


.01739 


.26990 


. 0004417 


57606 


2.74 


132 


3.0790 


.02333 


.08436 


. 000639 1 


57608 


2.64 


438 


8.6189 


.01968 


. 22756 


.0005195 


57805 


2.87 


270 


4.8988 


.01814 


. 14060 


.0005207 


58206 


2.67 


148 


1.3961 


. 00943 


.03728 


. 0002519 


58505 


2.95 


273 


7.4516 


. 02730 


. 21982 


. 0008052 


5881 15 


- 2.74 


1,158 


23.1471 


.01999 


. 63422 


.0005464 


63106 


2.79 


165 


3.3006 


. 02001 


.09208 


. 0005581 


66005 


2.63 


370 


7. 6690 


.02073 


.20170 


. 0005451 


69506 


2.50 


663 


13. 5696 


. 02047 


.33923 


.0005117 


69705 


2.50 


244 


3. 7810 


. 01550 


.09453 


.0003874 


72406 


2.95 


430 


8.2929 


.01929 


. 24464 


. 0005689 


73308 


2.92 


624 


14.2986 


.02291 


.41, 52 


. 0006539 


74506 


2.73 


23 


.4096 


.01781 


.01118 


.0004862 


74508 


2.60 


57 


.8172 


.01434 


.02125 


. 0003728 


74605 


2.60 


399 


7.1181 


.01784 


. 18507 


. 0004638 



62 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 8. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. Crop of 

1903— Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued 



Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 

proteid 
nitrogen 

in kernels. 


Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Total pro- 
teid nitro- 
gen in all 

kernels 
(gram). 


Proteid 

nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 

kernel. 


74607 

81405 

81505 

81706 

85205 

85206... 

86105 

86106 

88605 

88606 

88607 

88905 

88906 

91906 

92205 

92206 

92207 

92208 

92305 

92408 

92507 

94206 

94207 

94907 

95506 

95507 

95508 

95705 

95706 

Average 


2.56 
2.62 
2.94 
2.71 
2.60 
2.66 
2. 56 
2. 63 
2. SI) 
2.53 
2.61 
2.83 
2.65 
2.81 
2.74 
2.67 
2. 55 
2. 72 
2l93 
2.97 
2.58 
2.78 
2.86 
2.94 
2.81 
2.74 
2.59 
2.56 
2.54 
2.73 


491 
240 
146 
722 
214 
376 
203 
436 

69 
481 
234 
293 
546 
200 
345 

46 
209 
353 
160 
207 
505 
402 
718 
626 

37 
597 
571 
740 
636 
267 


8.3406 

4.5737 

2.8327 

15.3928 

3. 1766 

4.9315 

3.0282 

7.6241 

1 . 6362 

9.9456 

5. 1584 

5.3069 

9.9034 

3.5486 

5. 2616 

1.1074 

3.6926 

6. 6206 

2. 3859 

3. 7820 

9. 6779 

7. 5006 

13.7057 

12. 1918 

.3146 

11.0548 

12. 1592 

14.4617 

10. 3426 

5. 1629 


0.01699 
.01862 

. 01940 
.02132 
.01625 
.01312 
.01195 
.01749 
.02731 
.02068 
. 02205 
.01811 
.01814 
.01774 
.01525 
.02407 
.01767 
.01876 
.01191 
.01827 
.01916 
. 01866 
.01909 
. 0194S 
. 00850 
. 01852 
. 02030 
.01954 
. 01626 
. 01934 


0.21352 
.11710 
.08328 
.41715 
.09039 
.13118 
. 07964 
. 20052 
.04581 
.25162 
. 13463 
. 15019 
.26245 
.09972 
.14417 
.02957 
.09416 
. 18008 
.06991 
.11233 
. 24969 
. 20851 
.39199 
. 35S44 
. 00884 
.30291 
.31492 
. 37023 
. 26270 
. 14095 


0. 0004349 
.0004879 
.0005704 
.0005778 
.0004224 
.0003332 
.0003923 
. 0004599 
.0007640 
.0005231 
.0005754 
.0005126 
.0004807 
.0004986 
.0004179 
.0006428 
.0004505 
.0005102 
.0004369 
.0005426 
.0004944 
.0005187 
.0005460 
.0005726 
.0002389 
.0005074 
.0005515 
. 0005003 
.0004131 
. 0005279 


2.731 370.36 


7. 1755 


.019354 ; .194423 


.00052706 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17305 


3.03 


183 


3. 6302 


0.01984 


0. 10999 


0.0006010 


17306 


3.09 


243 


3.9968 


.01645 


.12350 


.0005082 


17307 


3.46 


138 


3. 1454 


.02280 


. 10883 


.0007886 


17308 


3.25 


61 


1.2275 


.02012 


.03994 


.0006540 


17406 


3.29 


124 


2.0907 


.01683 


.06878 


.00055(7 


18906 


3.48 


65 


.9229 


.01120 


.03212 


.0004941 


20705 


3.09 


109 


1.8517 


.01698 


.05722 


. 0005249 


20709 


3.05 


258 


5. 3229 


.02063 


. 16235 


. . 0006292 


20S05 


3.32 


697 


14.6942 


.02157 


.48784 


. 0006999 


21205 


3. 16 


123 


2. 3642 


.01922 


.07471 


. 0006074 


21208 


3. 24 


287 


5. L594 


.01798 


. 16712 


. 0005824 


21211 


3.15 


10 


.2806 


.02806 


.00884 


.0008839 


21307 


3.04 


143 


2.5691 


.01791', 


.0 7 810 


.0005461 


21308 


3. 45 


354 


5. 8080 


.01641 


. 20038 


. 0005660 


21906 


3.18 


408 


10.4800 


.02563 


. 33403 


. 0008168 


21907 


3.35 


158 


2.9248 


.01851 


.09-98 


. 0006201 


21913 


3.01 


492 


10. 1925 


.02072 


. 30680 


.0006235 


22206 


3. 22 


146 


2. 5712 


.01720 


.08086 


.0005538 


22208 


3.18 


118 


1.9090 


.01619 


.06071 


.0005144 


22210 


3. 17 


298 


6. 0173 


.02019 


. 19075 


.0006401 


22211 


3.17 


561 


11.56 7 5 


.02062 


.36671 


.0006537 


26105 


3.02 


131 


1.8242 


.01393 


.05508 


.0003662 


26808 


3.09 


222 


3.8811 


.01748 


. 11992 


.0005402 


27507 


3.08 


75 


1.3746 


. 01833 


.04234 


.0005646 


28206 


3.07 


219 


4.3698 


.01996 


.13415 


.0006126 


28806 


3.02 


685 


14.4630 


.02111 


.43679 


.0006376 


32207 


3.48 


69 


1.25"3 


.01822 


. 04375 


.0006341 


33305 ,... 


3.41 


150 


3. 1346 


.02090 


. 106S9 


.0007126 


33607 


3. 22 


136 


2.8903 


.02125 


.09307 


.0006843 


34606 


3. 12 


280 


6. 1962 


.02213 


. 19332 


. 0006904 


39507 


3.02 


111 


1.8862 


.01699 


.05696 


.0005132 


40305 


3.11 


179 


3. 6003 


.02011 


.11197 


. 0006255 


(0105 


3.17 
3.07 


46 
66 


.6316 

1 . 4S92 


.01373 
. 02251 


.02002 
.04572 


.0004352 
.0006927 


42405 


42905 


3.17 


67 


1.2499 


. 01866 


.03650 


.0005447 


46105 


3.00 


260 


4.6146 


.01775 


.13843 


.0005324 


48306 


3.29 


157 


2. 6571 


.01692 


.08742 


.0005568 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



63 



Table 8. 



-Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. Cropof 
1903— Continued. 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 





Percent- 


Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Weight (in grams) of— 


Total pro- 


Proteid 


Record num- 
ber, 


age of 

proteid 

nitrogen 

in kernels. 






teid nitro- 
gen in all 
"kernels 
(gram). 


nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


48405 


3.31 


76 


0.9701 


0. 01276 


0.03211 


0.0004225 


48506 


3.20 


556 


9.4585 


.01701 


. 30267 


.0005444 


48705 


3.13 


264 


1.3615 


.01652 


. 13652 


.0005171 


48706 


3.00 


379 


6. 1986 


.01635 


. 18596 


.0004906 


49505 


3. 24 


67 


1.2716 


.01898 


.04120 


. 0006149 


50905 


3.30 


221 


u.;;<is2 


.01085 


.07914 


.0003581 


55005 


3.05 


393 


7.96S4 


.02028 


. 24304 


.0006185 


55006 


3.16 


451 


7. 1852 


.01593 


. 22705 


.0005034 


55205 


3.10 


40 


.6893 


.01723 


.02137 


.()()( 15342 


55508 


3.11 


216 


3.7407 


.01732 


.11636 


.0005386 


57305 


3.19 


501 


8. 5777 


.01666 


.29188 


.0005326 


579115 


3.18 


221 


2.4731 


.01118 


.07859 


. 0003556 


58207 


3.09 


307 


4.2207 


.01375 


. 13042 


.0004248 


58705 


3.01 


235 


2. 5436 


.01082 


. 07656 


.0003256 


62805 


3.25 


111 


1.3451 


.01212 


.04272 


.0003938 


63105 


3.24 


90 


1.5452 


.01717 


. 05007 


. 0005563 


72405 


3.36 


213 


8.4415 


.03963 


. 28363 


.0013316 


72707 


3.49 


225 


4.5806 


.02036 


. 15986 


.0007105 


72806 


3.01 


110 


2.0970 


.01906 


.06312 


. 0005738 


74507 


3.02 


493 


9.2130 


.01869 


.27823 


.0005644 


81406 


3.31 


72 


1.2391 


.01721 


.04101 


. 0005697 


84906 


3.43 


382 


7.5438 


.01975 


. 25873 


. 0006773 


91305 


3.21 


138 


3.0940 


. 02242 


.09932 


.0007197 


91905 


3.36 


198 


3.4436 


.01739 


.11570 


.0005844 


92405 


3.10 


214 


3. 4356 


.01605 


. 10650 


.0004977 


92406 


3.11 


380 


8. 2366 


.02168 


. 25616 


.0006741 




3.00 


156 


2.6615 


.01706 


.07985 


.0005118 


94208 


3.10 


322 


3. 782S 


.01175 


.11727 


. 0003642 


94906 

Average 


3.41 


685 


12.3862 


.01808 


. 42236 


.0006166 


3.184 


235.5 


4.38558 


- .018366 


. 139656 


.00058156 



3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17506 


3.52 


93 


2. 2881 


0. 02460 


0.08044 


0. 0008660 


17507 


3.80 


43 


.7220 


.01795 


.02933 


.0006822 




3.81 


103 


1.4864 


.01443 


.05663 


.0005498 


21209 


3.61 


89 


1.4484 


.01627 


.05228 


.0005875 


21811 


3.75 


567 


11.9114 


.02101 


.44666 


.0007877 


21908 


3.82 


173 


3. 5574 


.02056 


. 13589 


.0007855 


22209 


3.84 


31 


.4336 


.01399 


.01665 


.0005371 


26107 


3.92 


144 


2.0390 


.01416 


.07993 


.0005551 


32608 


3.78 


55 


1.0183 


.01851 


.03849 


.0006998 


34206 


3.73 


81 


1.5940 


.01968 


.05946 


.0007340 


36905 


3.88 


267 


5.0200 


.01880 


. 19478 


.0007295 


38505 


3.61 


563 


12. 1088 


.02252 


.43713 


.0007764 


42205 


3.63 


94 


1.8494 


.01967 


.06713 


.0007142 


45005 


3.58 


235 


3. 2340 


.01376 


.11575 


.0004927 


48505 


3.66 


137 


1.9154 


. 01398 


.07010 


.0005117 


49905 


3.62 


23 


.6760 


.02939 


.02436 


.0010640 


50705 


3.54 


30 


.5958 


.01986 


.02109 


.0007032 


50906 


3.57 


114 


1.7280 


.01516 


.06169 


.0005411 


66006 


3.54 


366 


6.0090 


.01642 


. 21272 


.0005812 


66008 


3.59 


174 


3. 1555 


.01814 


.11328 


.0006510 


72706 


3.86 


591 


14.6802 


.02484 


.56666 


. 0009588 


94909 

Average 


3.60 


218 


3.6977 


.01696 


. 13312 


.0006106 


3.69 


190.5 


3.68947 


.018666 


. 13698 


.00068723 



(54 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 8. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid nitrogen. Crop 

of 1903— Continued. 



4 TO 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 





Percent- 


Number 
of ker- 
nels per 
plant. 


Weight (in 


grams) of — 


Total pro- 


Proteid 


Record num- 
ber. 


age of 

proteid 

nitrogen 

in kernels. 


Kernels 
per plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


teid nitro- 
gen in all 
kernels 
(gram). 


nitrogen in 
average ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


21812 


4.26 


983 


14.8139 


0.01507 


0. 63107 


0.0006420 


21813 


4.04 


216 


4.0258 


.01877 


. 16377 


.0007582 


21909 


4.43 


525 


12. 1S19 


.(12317 


.53S.VI 


. 0010265 


27308 


4.15 


254 


4.5123 


.01777 


. 18726 


.0007373 


3140", 


4.33 


207 


4. 1281 


. 01994 


. 17875 


. 000S635 


43505 


4.13 


93 


1 . 4464 


.01555 


.05974 


. 0006423 


15705 


4.18 


44 


.7532 


.01712 


. 03148 


.0007155 


55007 


4.21 


118 


2. 1571 


.01828 


. 09082 


.0007696 


69305 


4.42 


103 


2.0430 


.01984 


.09030 


.0008767 


76206 


4.45 


447 


5.4111 


.01217 


.21213 


.0005417 


92506 

Average 


4.39 


229 


3. 8709 


.01690 


. 1H993 


. 0007421 


4.27 


292.6 


5.03397 


.017689 


. 21674 


.00075594 



MORE THAN 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN 



17505 


4.70 


29 


0. 3885 


0.01340 


0. 01826 


0.0006296 


21206 


5.23 


149 


2.S5H4 


.01917 


. 14939 


.0010021; 


21210 


5.03 


237 


3.9143 


.01578 


. 19689 


. 0007934 


21706 


4.71 


S07 


19.3318 


.02390 


.91052 


.0011283 


21911 


5.48 


383 


8. 4593 


.02209 


. 46356 


.0012103 


38605 


5.85 


61 


1.2124 


.01988 


. 07093 


.0011627 


38607 


4.55 


19 


.3037 


.01598 


.01382 


.0007273 


40205 


4.69 


194 


3. 6302 


.01871 


. 17026 


.0008776 


48406 


4.87 


249 


3.2964 


.01324 


. 16053 


.0006447 


65305 


4.92 


78 


1.8018 


. 02310 


.08865 


.0011365 


69805 


5.82 


110 


2.4420 


. 02220 


. 14213 


.0012921 


72605 


4. 65 


65 


1.1166 


.01718 


. 05192 


.0007988 


72607 


5.59 


188 


3.4442 


.01832 


. 19253 


.0010241 


92306 

Average 


4.93 


347 


6.0091 


.01732 


.29625 


. 0008539 


5.07 


208. 28 


4. 15727 


. 01859 


. 208974 


.0009487 



Table 9, 



-Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. Crop of 1903. 



Range of per- 
centage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Percent- 
age of 


Number of— 


Weight (in grams) 
of— 


Proteid nitrogen 
(in grams) in- 


proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Analy- 
ses. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


All ker- 
nels. 


Average 
kernel. 


1 to 2 


1.749 

2.32 

2.73 

3.18 

3.69 

4.27 

5.07 


28 
65 
145 
66 
22 
11 
14 


320.3 

396 

370 

235 

190 

292 

208 


6.2382 
8. 2502 
7. 1755 


0.01871 
.02011 
.01935 


0. 10655 
. 19032 
. 19442 
. 13966 
. 13698 
.21674 
. 20897 


0.0003291 
.0004660 
.0005271 
.0005816 
.0006872 
.0007559 
.0009487 


2 to 2.5 


2.5 to 3 


3 to 3.5 


4.3856 .01837 
3.6895 ! .01867 
5.0340 .01769 


3.5 to 4 


4 to 4.5 


4.5 and over. . . . 


4.1573 


.01859 



Table 10 shows the analyses of the crop of 1903 arranged on the 
basis of weight of average kernel. Determinations of gliadin and 
glutenin were made in these analyses and the sums of these are 
inserted in this table/' All plants having an average kernel weight 

a Determinations of gliadin and glutenin were made by methods practically the same as 
those described by Prof. Harry Snyder in Bulletin No. 63 of the Minnesota Experiment 
Station, except that smaller quantities were used. 



SOME PROPEETIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



65 



of less than 0.010 gram form the first class and each succeeding clas-; 
increases by 0.002 gram. Table 11 is a summary of these analyses. 

Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to in ight ofavi rage "kernel. Crop of 1903. 
WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.000 TO 0.010 GRAM. 



Record 
number. 


Weighl 
of aver- 

kernel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels 

on 
plant. 


Weight 
Of kernels 


Per- 
centage 
of pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 


Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 

plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin niti 
(gram) in- 


on plant 
(grams). 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


Average 

kernel. 


Kernels 
mi plant. 


22205 0. on; i.".:! 
57105 .00916 
58206 00943 


283 

1(17 
14S 


2.6965 

:;. 7263 

1.3961 

.3146 


2.81 
2. 7C» 
2.67 
2. 81 


0. 0002677 
.0002527 

.01 102.-, hi 

.0002389 


0.07577 
. 10285 
.03728 

.00884 


1.97 


0. 0001877 


0.05312 






95505. .00850 

















Average . 


.00915 


219 2.0334 


2.76 


. 0002.528 


.05618 


1.97 


.0001877 


.05312 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.010 TO 0.012 GRAM. 



37906 

45605 

.50905 

57905 

58705 
94208 

Average . 


0.01086 
.01161 
.01085 
.01118 
.01082 
. 01 17.5 


19 

61 
221 
221 
235 
322 


0.2063 

.7081 
2.3982 

2. 17:11 
2.5436 
3. 7828 


2.44 
2.82 
3.30 
3.18 
3.01 
3.10 


0.0002649 
. 0003273 
.0003581 
.0003556 
.0003258 
.0003642 


0.00503 
.01997 
,0791 1 
.07859 
.07656 
.11727 














2.92 
2.47 


0.0003264 

.0002673 


0.(17221 
.06283 








.01118 


179 


2.0187 


2.98 


. 0003326 


. 06276 


2.69 


.0002968 


.06752 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.012 TO 0.014 GRAM. 



17505 
22209 
26105 
39606 
40405 
42206 
4500.5 
45805 
48405 

48406 

48408 

50706 
58207 
58905 
62805 
76206 
85206 
94605 

Average . 


0.01340 
.01399 
.01393 
.01341 
. 01373 
.01264 
.01376 
.01234 
.01276 
.01324 
.01291 
.01398 
.01343 
.01375 
.01355 
.01212 
.01217 
.01312 
.01307 


29 

31 
131 
346 

46 

25 
235 
124 

76 
249 

27 
137 

35 
307 
170 
111 
447 
376 

56 


0. 3885 

.4336 
1.8242 
4.6383 

.6316 

.3161 
3.2340 
1.5298 

.9701 
3.2964 

.3485 
1.9154 

.4701 
4. 2207 
2.3031 
1.3151 
5.4411 
4.9315 

.7319 


4.70 
3. 84 
3.02 
2.37 
3.17 
1.46 
3.58 
1.84 
3.31 
4.87 
2.81 
3.66 
2. SO 
3.09 
2.43 
3.25 
4.45 
2.66 
1.95 


0.0006296 

.0005371 
.0003662 

.0003177 
. 0004352 
.0001846 
. 0004927 
. 0002700 
.0004225 
.0006447 
.0003627 
.0005117 
.0003761 
.000424S 
. 0003292 
.0003938 
.0005417 
.0003332 
.0002549 


0.01826 
.01665 

.05.508 
. 109(i7 
.02002 
.00462 
.11575 
.02815 
.03211 
. 160.53 
.00979 
.07010 
.01316 
. 13042 
.05596 
. 04272 
.24213 
.13118 
.01127 






























1.36 


0.0001871 


0. 04398 








2. 25 


.0002979 


.08168 


1.76 


.0002460 


.03371 


2.49 


. 0003424 


. 10510 






2.03 


.0002471 


.11046 














.01323 


155.7 


2.0510 


3.12 


.0004120 


.06687 


1.98 


.0002641 


.07499 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.014 TO 0.016 GRAM. 



18905 
18906 
21210 
21710 

21812 

26107 
33408 
38607 

43505 

48407 
50906 

55006 

.55305 

57006 


0.01567 
.01443 
.01420 
.01577 
.01437 
.01507 
.01416 
.01446 
.01598 
.015.5.5 
.01572 
.01516 
.01593 
.01507 
.01453 


137 

103 

65 

237 

59 

983 

144 

77 

19 

93 

718 

114 

451 

167 

701 


2. 1462 

1.4864 

.9229 

3.9143 

.8478 

14. 8139 

2. 0390 

1.1132 

.3037 

1.4464 

11.2890 

1.7280 

7.1852 

2.5160 

10. 1836 


2.02 
3.81 
3.48 
5.03 
2.59 
4.26 
3.92 
1.39 
4.55 
4.13 
1.50 
3.57 
3.16 
2.48 
2.76 


0.0003164 
.0005498 

.0004941 
.0007934 

. 0003722 
.0006420 
.0005551 
. 0002009 
. 0007273 
.000:1123 
. 0002358 
.0005411 
. 0005034 
. 0003736 
.0004010 


0. 04335 
.05663 
.03212 
. 19689 
.02196 
.63107 
.07993 
.01547 
.01382 
.05974 
.16933 
.0(11(19 
.22705 
.06240 
. 28107 








1.54 


0.0003218 


0.03315 


1.34 


.0002113 


. 05245 


2.02 

1.35 


.0003044 
.0001912 


. 29934 
. 027.53 


























1.75 
1.97 


.0002788 
.0002969 


. 12574 
.04957 







27889— No. 78—05- 



66 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average kernel. Crop of 

1903— Continued. 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, n.nn To 0.016 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 
number. 


Weight 

of aver- 
age 
kernel 

(gram). 


K i Weight 
, h0 ' ' of kernels 
ke ™ els on plant 

plant. <*"""»■ 


Per- 
centage 

of pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in - 


Percent- 
age of 
g'iadin- 
plus-glu- 

tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 
(gram) in — 


A vt irage 
kernel. 


Kernels 

on plant. 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


57506 
63506 
69705 
72905 
74508 
86105 


0.01534 
.01568 

.01550 
.01585 

.01434 
.01495 

(ll.'i'Vi 


180 2.7616 
153 2.3986 
244 1 3.7810 
167 2.6462 

:.7 . 8172 
203 ' 3.0282 
345 i 5.261(1 
160 2.3859 
176 2.7000 

181 2.8816 
286 4.4423 

52 . 7577 


2.80 
2. 11 
2.50 
2. 18 
2.60 
2.56 
2.74 
2.93 
3.50 
2.99 
2.35 
2.47 


0. 0004296 
.01103*25 
. 0003874 
. 0003930 
. 0003728 
.0003923 
.0004179 
.0004369 
.0005369 
.0004760 
.0003650 
. 0003599 


0. 07733 
.05853 
.09453 
.06563 
.02125 
. 07964 
.14417 
.06991 
.09450 
. 08616 
.10439 
. 01872 


2.34 0.0003590 


0.OC4I 2 






















92305 


1)1 I'll 






92905 .01534 

92906 .01592 

94905 01553 

95707 fl14fi7 
























Average . 


.01516 


232 3.5480 


3.00 


.0004555 


. 10619 


1.76 


.0002805 .09320 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.016 TO 0.018 GRAM. 



17306.. 

17406.. 
17507.. 
20711.-... 
21208.. 
21209.. 
21307.. 
21308.. 
21805.. 
21808.. 
22206.. 
22208. . 
26806.. 

2(1*08.. 

26907.. 
26909. . 

27308.. 
33106.. 
33406.. 
37707.. 
39507.. 
44505. . 
45705.. 
46105.. 
46107.. 
48306. . 
48506.. 
48705.. 
48706.. 
48806.. 
55205. . 
55307.. 
55508.. 
55607.. 
55905.. 
55906.. 
56105.. 
56107.. 
56209.. 
57005.. 
57305. . 
57308. . 
57509. . 
59606.. 
60605. . 
63105.. 

Ill ill! Hi. 



0.01645 


243 


.01686 


124 


. 01795 


43 


.01698 


109 


.01798 


287 


.01627 


89 


.01796 


143 


.01641 


354 


.01699 


1,232 


.01708 


1,156 


.01720 


146 


.01619 


118 


.01793 


152 


.01748 


222 


.01792 


102 


.01667 


180 1 


. 017.77 


254 


.01716 


is 


. 01627 


283 


.01710 


193 1 


.011199 


111 1 


.017114 


340 


.01712 


44 


.01775 


260 1 


.0175(1 


478 


.01692 


157 


.01701 


556 


.01652 


264 


.01635 


379 


. 01798 


547 


.01723 


40 


.01663 


342 


.01732 


216 


.01734 


138 


.01751 


331 


.01(103 


199 


.01709 


336 


.01658 


872 


.01664 


950 


.0174(1 


88 


.01666 


501 


.01705 


57 / 


.01739 


(ill 


.01712 


567 


.01701 


35 


.01717 


90 


.01642 


366 



3.9968 

2.0907 

.7720 

1.8517 

5. 1594 

1.4484 

2.5691 

5.8080 

20.9290 

19.7446 

2.5712 

1.9090 

2. 7255 

3.8811 

1.8276 

2.9999 

4.5123 

.3089 

4.6045 

3.3004 

1.8862 

5.9990 

. 7532 

4.6146 

8.3935 

2.6571 

9.4585 

4.3615 

6. 1986 

9.8346 

.6893 

5. 6864 

3. 7407 

2. 3931 

5. 7948 

7.9968 

5.7431 

14. 4556 

15.8086 

1.5364 

8. 5777 

9.8378 

10. 6261 

• 9. 7084 

.5952 

1.5452 

6.0090 



3.09 
3.29 
3.80 
3.09 
3.24 
3.61 
3.04 
3.45 
2. 69 
2.57 
3.22 
3.18 
2.60 
3.09 
2.61 
2.80 
4.15 
2.94 
2.87 
2.93 
3.02 
2.94 
4.18 
3.00 
2.54 
3.29 
3.20 
3.13 
3.00 
2.70 
3.10 
1.89 
3.11 
2.69 
2.67 
2. 81 
2.73 
2.96 
2.59 
2.71 
3.19 
1.69 
2.54 
2.16 
1.87 
3.24 
3.54 



0.OOO5OS2 
. 0005547 
. 0006822 
. 0005249 
.0005824 
.0005875 

.00051(11 
.0005660 
. 0004569 
.00043*9 
. 0005538 
.0005144 
. 0004662 
.0005402 
. 0004677 
.0004667 
.0007373 
.0005045 
.0004670 
.0005010 
.0005132 
.00051S7 
.0007155 
.0005324 
.0004460 
.00055(18 
. 0005444 
.0005171 
. 0004906 
. 0004877 
. 0005342 
.0003112 
.0005386 

.0001(1(15 

. 0004674 
. 0004503 
.0004667 
. 0004907 
.(1001311) 
.0001731 
.0005826 
.0002*81 
.0004417 
.(Kin;;i 98 
.0003180 
.0005563 
.0005812 



0. 12350 
.06878 

. 02934 
. 05722 
.1(1712 
.05228 
.07810 
. 20038 
. 56299 
. 50744 
. 08086 
.0(1071 
.0708H 
. 1 1992 
. 04995 
.08400 
. 1 872H 
.0001)8 



.13215 
.09870 
.05696 

. 17637 
.03148 
. 13843 
.21319 
. 0S742 
. 30267 
. 13652 
. 18596 
. 26553 
.02137 
. 10747 
.11636 
. 06437 
. 15470 
.22471 
.15679 
.42790 
. 10015 
.041(14 
.29188 
. 16626 
.21 990 
.20070 

.01113 

.05007 
.21272 



1.96 

2.11 
2.14 



2.10 



2.08 
2.13 

2.17 
1.56 



1.56 
1.96 



1.75 
1.47 
2.12 
2.23 
2. 21 
2^ 09 



0.CO33S fi 11093 



.0003348 

.00031 Ji 
.00034l'5 



.0003935 

.'6003134" 



.0003(152 
.0003C04 

.0003. 91 
.0002577 



.0002504 
.001 1331 15 



.00030(14 
.0002356 
.OIK 13(122 
.0003697 
.01103(177 
.0003649 



.38700 
.05125 
. 04084 



.05(140 



.0003591 , .0..931 



. 17158 
.05660 

.20525 
. 08804 



.08871 

.07332 



.10141 
.11755 
. 12175 

.3223H 
. 34937 
.03211 



.08292 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



tH 



Table 10. — Analyses of plans, arranged according to weight of average Tcernel. Crop / 

/ 903— Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.016 TO 0.018 CHAM -Continued. 



Record 

quid er. 


Weight 
nf aver- 
age 
kernel 

(gram) . 


Num- 
ber of 

kernels 

mi 
plant. 


Weight 
of kernels 
on plant 
(grams). 


Per- 
centage 

of pro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteld nitrogen 
(gram) in 


Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kerni Is. 


Gliadin-phis-glu- 
tenin iiitr ogcn 
(grain 1 in 


Average 
kernel. 


Kernels 

mi plant. 


Average 

kernel. 


Kernels 
on plant. 


721 <)< 
74501 
74605 

74i,((7 
76205 
81406 
85205 

861 or, 

91906 

92207 
92306 
92405 
92407 

92506 
92908 
94407 
94909 
95510 
95705 

Average . 


0.01718 
.01724 
.01781 
.01784 
.01(99 
.01695 
.01721 
.01625 
.01749 
.01739 
.01774 
.01767 
.01732 
.01605 
.01695 
.01706 
.01690 
.111732 
.01615 
.01696 
.01783 
.01626 


65 

.-,43 

23 

399- 
491 
198 
72 
214 
436 
198 
200 
209 
347 
214 
53 
156 
229 
1ST 
419 
218 
159 
636 


1.1166 
9.3629 
.4096 
7.1181 
8.3406 
8. HOT 
1.2391 
3.4766 
7.6241 
3.4436 
3.5486 
3.6926 
6.0091 
.;. 1356 
.8983 
2.6615 
3.8709 
3.2388 
6.7664 
3.6977 
2.8356 
10.3426 


4. 65 
1 . 89 
2.73 
2.60 
2.56 
2. 35 
3.31 
2 60 
'J.r.\ 
3.36 
2.81 
2.55 
4.93 
3. in 
1 . 66 
3.00 
4.30 
2. 32 
2.07 

3.eo 

1.81 
2.54 


0.0007988 
.0003414 
.0004862 
.0004638 

1310 

.0003983 
.0005697 
. 0004224 
. 0004599 
.0005844 
. 0004986 
.olio Co:, 
. 0008539 
.0004977 
.0002814 
.0005118 
.0007421 
.0004018 
.0003343 
.0008108 
.0003228 
.0004131 


0.05192 
. 18538 
.01118 
. 18507 
.21352 
. 19836 
.04101 
.00030 
.20052 
.11570 






















































.00072 
.09416 
.29625 
. 10650 











4.06 


0.0007032 


0.24397 


.01491 
.07985 













. 16993 




.07.-,! 1 
.14007 
. 13312 
.05132 
.26270 














.01709 


305.9 


5. 2055 


2.93 


.0005020 


. 14618 


'J. 07 


3519 


. 13548 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.018 TO 0.020 GRAM. 



17S05... 
17 108.. . 
17409... 
20710... 
2120-.. . 
21206... 
21207... 
21306... 
21711... 
21809... 
21810... 
21813... 
21905. . . 
21907... 
21912... 
22207... 
26905... 
26908... 
27005... 
27205. . . 
27306... 
27307... 
27507. . . 
28206... 
32207... 
32608. . . 
33105... 
33107... 
3310.-,. . 
33906... 
3420.-,... 
3420:,... 
34208... 
34405... 
36905. . . 
37305... 
37705... 
3800.5... 
38506... 
38605... 
38608. . . 
38706... 
40205... 



0.01984 


183 


.01852 


497 


.01857 


802 


. 01974 


867 


. 01922 


123 


.01917 


149 


. 01955 


118 


.01837 


226 


.01968 


873 


.01919 


418 


. 01982 


52 


.01877 


216 


.01809 


791 


.01851 


158 


.01907 


510 


.01940 


169 


.01936 


326 


.01859 


228 


.01895 


866 


.01841 


891 


.01945 


684 


.01847 


167 


.01X33 


75 


.01996 


219 


.01822 


69 


.01851 


55 


.01939 


132 


.01919 


318 


.01930 


421 


.01921 


119 


.01972 


404 


.01968 


81 


.01916 


156 


.01091 


207 


.01880 


207 


.01987 


309 


.01972 


401 


.01808 


139 


. 01975 


85 


.01987 


61 


.01913 


158 


.01988 


365 ; 


.01871 


194 



3.6302 


3.03 


9.2038 


2.18 


14.8957 


2.75 


17. 1115 


2.83 


2.3642 


3. 16 


2.8564 


5.23 


2.3066 


2.96 


4.1516 


2.90 


17. 1S20 


2.71 


8.0214 


2. 73 


1.0301 


2.69 


4.0258 


4.04 


14.3111 


2.04 


2. 9248 


3. 35 


9.7236 


2.31 


3. 27X7 


2. 77 


6. 1102 


2. 70 


4.2376 


2.71 


16.4120 


2. 63 


16.4061 


2.41 


13.3011 


2. 47 


3.0850 


2.53 


1.3740 


3.08 


4.3698 


3.07 


1 . 2573 


3. 48 


1.0183 


3.78 


2.5601 


2.91 


0.1020 


2. 35 


8. 1268 


2.03 


2. 2862 


2.81 


9. 1498 


2.73 


1.5940 


3.73 


'J. 9 SSI, 


2.13 


4.12X1 


4.33 


5.0200 


3.88 


6. 1394 


2.96 


S.ll'IO.-, 


2.64 


2.5134 


2.84 


1.6799 


2.89 


1.2124 


5.85 


3.0228 


2.82 


7. 2545 


2.59 


3.0302 


4.09 



0.0006010 
. 0004037 
.0005108 
. 0005586 
.0006074 
.0010026 
.0005766 
.0005327 
.0005334 
.0005238 
. 0005330 
. 0007582 
.0004777 
.0000201 
. 0004404 
.0005374 
. 0005427 
. 0005037 
.00049X4 
. 0004137 
.0(104X03 
.0004074 
.0005646 
.0006126 
.0006341 
.0006998 
.0005611 
.0004510 
.0003919 
. 0005399 
.0005383 
.0007340 

.00040X1 

.0008635 
.0007295 
.0005881 

.0005327 
.0005135 
.0005712 
.0011627 
.0 005394 
.OOfioTTS 
.0008776 



0. 10999 
.20065 
. 10964 
. 4X42X 
.07471 
. 14939 
.06804 
. 12039 
. 16563 
.21898 
.02772 
. 16377 
.377X1 
.09798 
.22461 
.09082 
.17092 
.114X4 
. 13104 

.39539 
. 32853 

.07X0.-, 

.04234 
.13415 
.0437.-, 
.03849 
.07450 
.14341 
. 16498 
.06424 
.21979 
.05946 
.00300 
. 1 7x7.-, 
. 19478 
.18173 
.23998 
.07138 
.04855 
.07093 
.08522 
. 18789 
.17020 



2. IS 



2. U 
2. is 
2. 15 



1 . 82 

2.09 

1 . 82 
1 . 90 
1.70 



3.50 
1.92 



2.29 
1.20 
1.23 



1.73 
'3."07 



.0004183 



.0004017 
.0003944 

.00039X0 



.0003531 

.0004109 
.0003383 
. 00031 IKl 
.0003130 



.0004X30 .10575 



0.34222 



.000', 7X7 
.00(TTf03 



.0003309 
"6665744 



. 174X7 



.08015 
.31198 

.002XS 



.05967 

. 13398 
.07712 
.31182 

.27.-90 



.07450 

. 1204:; 



.0004865 .10073 



,0004550 .14060 
.0002485 .10194 
.0002224 .03091 



G8 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average kernel. Crop of 

1903— Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.018 To 0.020 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 
number. 



12205.... 

12905.. - 

44607.... 

15606.... 

46106.... 

48106.... 

[8508 

49505.... 

50705 

51005.... 
55007.... 
55008.... 
55206. . . . 
55306.... 
55507.'. .. 
56106.... 
56205.... 

56206 

57007.... 

57306.... 

57307.... 

57406.... 

57407.... 

57507.... 

57608.... 

57805.... 

58805.... 

59605.... 

(53505. . . . 

65306 

65307.... 

66008.... 

69305.... 

69505.... 

72406.... 

72607.... 

72806.... 

74507.... 

81405.... 

81505.... 

S4905... . 

84905.... 

88905.... 

88906.... 

92208. . . . 

92408. .. 

92409.... 

92507 

92909... 

94205 

94206 

94207.... 

94209.... 

94406 

94906... 

94907 

0491 IS. . . . 

95506 

95o08 

95706 

Average . 



Weight 
of aver- 
age 

kernel 
(gram). 



0.01967 

.01866 
.01806 
.01834 
.01964 
.01919 
.01858 



.01986 
.01804 
.01828 
.01846 

.0)965 
.01931 
. 01949 
.01866 
.01959 
.01829 
.01975 
.01838 
.01801 
.01846 
.01968 
.(11946 
.01968 
.01814 
.01999 
.01880 
.01934 
.01807 
.01878 
.01814 
.01984 
.01847 
.01929 
.01832 
.01906 
.01869 
.01862 
.01940 
.01927 
.01975 
.01811 
.01814 
.01876 
.01827 
.01814 
.01916 
.01916 
.01893 
.01866 
.01909 
.01895 
.01923 
. 01808 
.01948 
.01894 
.01852 
.01954 
.01931 



.01901 



Num- 
ber of 
kernels 

on 
plant. 



94 

07 
101 
220 

82 
cos 
603 

67 

30 
862 
118 
944 
578 
214 
504 
644 
333 
509 
168 
434 
261 
135 
762 
359 
438 
270 
1,158 
3S2 
208 
541 
373 
174 
103 
255 
430 
188 
110 
493 
240 
116 

37 
382 
293 
546 
353 
207 
315 
505 
529 

64 
402 
718 
190 
549 
685 
626 
125 
597 
740 
267 



349.6 



Per- 

Weight c f p ta o g - 

"'' kernels i i- 
°n Plant ™£ 

nels. 



[.8494 
1 . 2499 
1 . 8246 
1.0358 

1.6103 
11.6655 
11.2008 
1.2716 
.5958 
15.5835 
2.1571 
17.4226 
1 1 . 3592 
4. 1323 
9.8228 
L2.0161 
6.5232 
9.3093 
3.3176 
7.9772 
4.7117 
2. 4923 
14.9992 
6.9861 
8.6189 

4. S988 
23. ! 171 

7. 1S2S 

4.0230 

9.8298 

7.0051 

3.1555 

2.0430 

4.7116 

8. 2929 

3. 4442 

2.0970 

9.2130 

1.5737 

2. 8327 

.7130 

7.5438 

5. 3069 

9.9034 

6.6206 

3.7820 

5.7131 

9.6779 

Hi. L363 

1.2117 

7. 5006 

13.7057 

3.60011 

10.5556 

12.3862 

12. 1918 

2.3678 

11.0548 

14.4617 

5. 1629 



6. 6327 



3.63 
3.17 
2. II 
1.91 
2.54 
2.38 
2. 76 
3. 24 
3.54 

1 . 34 
4.21 
2.60 
2.56 
2.18 
2.63 
2.57 
2.51 
2.42 
2.65 
2.86 

2. 43 
2.75 
2.62 
2. 85 
2. til 
2.87 
2.74 
2. L2 
1.90 
2.41 
2.28 
3.59 
4.42 
2.29 
2.95 
5. 59 
3.01 
3.02 
2.62 
2.94 
2.32 
3.43 
2.83 
2.65 
2.72 
2.'.i7 
2.30 
2.58 
2. 70 
1.65 
2.78 
2.86 
2. 49 
2.47 
3.41 
2.94 
1.96 
2.74 
2.56 
2.73 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in- 



Average 
kernel. 



Kernels 
on plant. 



0.0007142 

.000.-, (17 
.0004408 

.0003504 

.000 10SS 

.0004567 
.0005127 
.0006149 

7032 

.0002122 

.00071101. 

. 0004799 
.0005031 

.0001210 

.0005126 

. 0004795 
.0004917 

.0001120 

.0005233 
.0005257 
.0004387 

17.077 

.0007. 157 
.OOO.V, 17, 
.0007,107, 
. 0007.207 
. 0005464 
. 00039S6 
.0003674 
.0004282 
. 0004355 
.0006510 
. 0008767 
. 0004231 
. 0005689 
.0010211 
.0007,73s 
.0005644 
.0004879 
.0007,701 
.0001171 
.0006773 
.0005126 
.0004807 
. 0005102 
.0005426 
.0004171 
.000 1044 
.0005173 
.0003124 
.0005187 
.0005460 
.0004719 
.0004749 
.0006166 
.0005726 
.0003713 
.0005074 
.0007,003 
. 0005279 



.0005476 



0.06713 
.03650 
.04452 

.07708 

.01000 
.27707, 
.3O9S0 
.01120 
.02100 
. 20881 
.09082 
. 15299 
.20070 
.09008 
.25834 
.30881 
. 16373 

.227,20 
.08792 
.22815 
. 1 1 447. 
.06854 
.39297 

. 10007, 
.2277,11 
.140110 
.63422 
. 15228 
.07644 
.23690 
. 15971 
.11328 
.09(130 
. 10790 
. 24464 
. 19253 
.06312 
. 27S23 
.11710 
.08328 
.0167,1 

. 25873 
. 15019 

. 26245 
. isoos 
.11233 
. 13140 
.24969 
.2736,7 
.01990 
.20851 
.39199 

.08965 
.26073 

. 42236 
.35844 
.04641 
.30291 
.37023 
.14095 



Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 



Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 
(gram) in- 



Average 
kernel. 



Kernels 
on plant. 



73 0.0005370 0.05049 



.0(1(13451 



2.21 
1.58 
1.87 



.00010 10 

.0002917 
.0003675 



2.07 .0004034 

2.09 .0003900 

1.85 .0003624 

1.95 i .0003566 



2.13 .0003932 
1.86 .0003660 
1.7,7, .0003016 



2.68 .0004861 
2.11 .0004218 



1.68 
1.81 



.0003036 
.0003399 



. 18039 



.20997 



. 04767 
. 27528 
.21241 



. 20333 
.27,114 
.12068 
. L8153 



.07,300 

.27898 
. 10828 



.13126 
.48839 



. 1671 14 
. 12(680 



. 08645 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.020 TO 0.022 GRAM. 



17308... 

17107.... 
20706... 
2070S. . . 

20709... 

20805... 



0.02012 


61 


.02127 


738 


.02033 


163 


. 02024 


122 


.02063 


258 


.0217,7 


697 



1 . 2277, 


3.25 


15. 6996 


2.13 


3.3138 


2.78 


2. 4690 


2. 58 


5. 3229 


3.05 


11.6912 


3.32 



0.0006540 

.009 17,31 
.0097,6,7,2 
.0007,221 

.000 '999 



0.03991 
.33441 
.09212 
.06399 
. 16235 
. 48784 



2.05 0.0004168 



2.31 
2.26 



. 0004766 
. 0004S75 



. 12296 

. 33208 



SOME PROPERTIES OF THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



69 



T\ble 10. Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average kernel. Crop of 

1903 — Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.020 TO 0.022 GRAM— Continued. 



Record 
number. 



21212.... 
21305.... 
21707.... 
21709.... 
21811.... 
21908.... 
21913.... 
22210.... 
22211.... 
25205.... 
26908.... 
27207.... 
27305.... 
27505.... 
28806.... 
32206.... 
32606.... 
33305.... 
33606.... 
33607.... 
33905.... 
3770-.... 
38606. . .. 
39205.... 
39405.... 
40305.... 

44605 

44606.... 
48409.... 
55005.... 
55506.... 
55605.... 
55908.... 

57405... 

57408... 

58806. 

631(16... 

65308... 

66005... 

69506... 

69806... 

72705... 

72707... 

73306... 

74305... 

74606,... 

80305... 

81705... 

81706... 

81709... 

84405... 

88606... 

88608... 

88609... 

92406.. . 

92907... 

95507... 

95509... 



Weighl 

of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 



Num- 
ber of 
kernels 
on 

plant. 



, Per- 
weight feff 

'" k,,, , l "' s teiani- 
on plant L. 

(grams). H| ,.,,,._ 
nels. 



0.02049 
.02004 
.02125 
.02141 
.02101 
.02056 
.02072 
.02019 
. 02062 
.IL'(H',6 
.02073 
.(12004 
.02085 
.02183 
.02111 
.02052 
.02145 
.02090 
.02144 
.02125 
.02194 
.02155 
.02110 
.02089 
. 02093 
.02011 
.02049 
.02035 
,02048 
.02028 
.02062 
.021*4 
.02175 
. 1 121 13 1 
. 02047 
.02019 
.02001 
.02008 
.02073 
.02047 
.02153 
.02191 
.02036 
.02062 
.02047 
. 02079 
.02165 
.02106 
.02132 
.02175 
.02043 
. 02068 
.02075 
.02100 
.02168 
. 02040 
.02029 
.02136 



Average.! .02085 



84 
312 
582 
361 
567 
173 
492 
298 
561 
522 
192 
166 
267 
539 
685 
507 

94 
150 
382 
136 
508 

56 
401 
1,031 
447 
179 

55 
124 
314 
393 
866 
500 
562 

41 
596 

05 

165 

583 
370 
663 

558 
372 
225 
414 
216 
464 
729 
465 
722 
757 
428 
481 
74 
470 
380 
219 
571 
138 



3S6.6 



1.7216 
6.2514 
12.3685 

7. 7296 

11.9114 

3. 5574 

10. 1025 

6.0173 

11.5675 

10.7836 

3.9797 

3.3266 

5.5666 

12.0300 

I 1. 1630 

10.4036 

2.0162 

3. 1346 

s. |S90 

2.8903 

11.1476 

1.2069 

v. 1605 

21.5300 

0.3511 

3.6003 

1.1271 

2.5235 

6.4302 

7.9684 

17.8506 

10.9180 

12.2210 

. X32X 

12.200 1 

1.01' 

3.3006 

11.7066 

7.6690 

13.5696 
12.0136 
9. 1522 
4.5806 
S. 5373 
4.4222 
0.6 151 
15.7835 

0.7022 
15.3928 
16.4692 
S. 744S 
9.9456 
1 . 5355 
9.8719 
8. 2366 
4.4673 
12. 1592 
2.9475 

8. 1267 



2. 16 
2. 67 
2. 10 
2.47 
3.75 
3.82 
3.01 
3.17 
3.17 
2.71 
2.96 
2. 92 
2.58 
2. 12 
3.02 
l.si 
2.ss 
3.41 
2.21 
3.22 
1.61 

2.34 

2.63 

2.11 

2.88 

3.11 

2. 86 

2.90 

2.02 

3.05 

2. so 

2. 64 

2. 12 

L.98 

2.61 

1.88 

2.79 

2.00 

2.63 

2.50 

1.66 

2. 13 

3.40 

2. 15 

1.98 

2.30 

l.si 

1.98 

2.71 

2. 28 

2. is 

2.53 

2. 17 

2. 42 

3.11 

2. 56 

2.50 

2. IS 

2.60 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in 



Average 

kernel. 



Kernels 
on plant 



0.0004427 
.ooo5;c,o 
.0004654 
.0005289 
.0007877 
.0007855 
. 0006235 
.0006401 
. 0006537 
.0005599 
.0006135 
.0005850 
.0005379 
.0004627 
.0008376 

.0003711 

.0006177 

.0007126 

.0004738 

.0006X43 

.0003533 

.0005053 

.OIK 155 10 

.0004407 

. 0006027 

.0006255 

.0005861 

.0005902 

.0004137 

.0006185 

. 01 H 15773 

.0005765 

.0005262 

.0004022 

. 0005343 

.0003853 

.0005581 

.0004197 

.0005451 

.0005117 

.0003574 

. 0004668 

.0007105 

. 0005052 

. 0004054 

.0004781 

.0003919 

.0001170 

. 0005778 

.0004960 

.0005067 

.0005231 

.0005125 

.0005082 

.000o741 

.0005220 

.0005515 

.0005297 

.(1005122 



Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 

tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 



0.037 IS 
. 166,01 
.270X6 
. 19002 
. 14666 
. 13589 
.30680 
. 19075 
.36671 
. 28560 
.11780 
.00712 
. 14362 
. 2 19 12 
. 131,70 
. 18831 
.05807 
. 10689 
. 18098 
. 09307 
. 17948 
.02824 
.22251 
. B435 
.21399 
.11197 
.03223 
.073 lx 
.129X0 
. 24303 
. 4995 
. 28823 
.2957.5 
.01649 
.31842 
.03660 
. 09208 
.24468 
.20170 
. 33923 
. 19943 
. 19936 
. 150X6 
.20918 
. 08756 
.221X1 
.28569 
. 19388 
.41715 
. 37548 
.216X7 
.25162 
.03793 
. 23890 
.25616 
.11436 
.31102 
.07310 



.20510 



2. 16 
1.88 



1.55 

l.f.9 



Gliadin-plus-glu- 
tenin nitrogen 

(gram) in- 



Average 
kernel. 



0.0003948 



Kerm Is 
on plant. 



.0004538 

. 0003955 



.0003129 

.0003485 



. 2572S 
.06688 



. 09327 
. 1954X 



2.16 
1.95 
1.73 
1.(5 
1.86 



.0004478 
.0003908 
. 0003607 
.0093602 
.0003926 



.0X596 
.061X7 
. 09630 
. 19X66 
. 26901 



.0005037 .07554 



.0005206 .070X1 



1.39 
1.84 

1.44 



1.29 
1 . 50 
1.99 
2.20 
1.96 
1.96 

"i.'tVT 



.0002933 .11760 
.0003844 .39635 
.0003014 .13470 



.0002625 
.0003072 

.000 1036 
. 0004536 
.0004281 
.0004263 



.03255 
.091 15 
. 15857 

.39272 
.21100 
.23953 



.0003357 .20008 



2.20 
1.95 
2. 18 



.0004402 

.0003016 
.0004519 



.172, 1 
.22X2X 
. 16714 



2.05 
1.77 
1.96 
2.03 



.0004262 

.0003X32 
.0OO412X 
. 0004328 



. 19772 
. 27937 
. 19193 
.31248 



1.92 .0003999 



WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.022 TO 0.024 GRAM. 



17307. 
17410. 
20707. 
21706. 
21708. 
21806. 
21909. 
21911. 



0.02279 


138 


.02285 


744 


.022X2 


444 


.02390 


807 


.02381 


390 


.02378 


599 


.02317 


525 


.02209 


383 



3. 1454 


3.46 


16.9987 


2.88 


0.0070 


2.77 


19.3318 


4.71 


0.2X50 


2. 33 


14.2450 


2.71 


12. 1X10 


4.43 


8. 4593 


5.48 



0.0007886 
.0006580 
.0006181 
.00112X3. 
. 0005547 
.0006444 
.0010265 
.0012103 



0.10883 


1 








.27113 
.91052 
.21634 

.3X6,01 

. 53889 


1 . 85 


0.0004222 


IV. ;S 










1.98 


.0005677 


29846 









70 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 10. — Analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average kernel. Crop of 

1903— Continued. 

WEIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, i.022 TO 0.024 CHAM -Continued. 






26100. 
26805. 
26807.. 
27506.. 
27508. . 
27509. . 

32 05 

33 07 
33605.. 
34207. 
34C06 
38505. 
38609. . 
12405. . 
13405. . 
18507. 
55308. 
55606.. 
56207.. 
56208. . 
57606 
57607. 
63107.. 
65305. . 
69805.. 
71905.. 
72708. . 
73307.. 
73308.. 
81707.. 
81710.. 
88607.. 
91305.. 



Average . 



Weigh! 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 



0.02281 
.02304 
.02248 
.02390 



Num- 
i i r of 
kernels 

on 
plant . 



Weighl ;, 
of kernels ' .^ ■_ 

nels. 



205 
90 

220 
721 



4.6754 

2.0737 
t.9456 

17.2324 



02252 


144 


10.11007, 


.02287 


27,1 


5. 5324 


.02206 


243 


5. 3615 


.02323 


227, 


5.2268 


.02271 


305 


7.0889 


.02347, 


301 


7.07,00 


.02219 


611 


13. 7,7,7,0 


.02213 


280 


6. 1962 


.02252 


7,03 


12. loss 


.02309 


203 


6. 7665 


.02251 


66 


1.4892 


.02258 


124 


2.8000 


. 02296 


70 


1.6036 


.02307, 


397 


9.5078 


. 0220.") 


503 


1 1 . 0030 


.02301 


462 


10.0073 


.0237,6 




13.7,720 


.02333 


132 


3.0700 


.02234 


736 


16.4433 


.02233 


417 


9.3120 


.02310 


7s 


1.8018 


.02220 


1 10 


2.-1120 


. 02239 


1 , 260 


28.2136 


.02270 


30S 


9.0386 


.02220 


25 


.5572 


.02201 


624 


1 1.20X0 


.02336 


786 


18. 3614 


.02308 


396 


0.1411 


.02207, 


231 


5.1584 


.02212 


138 


3. 0940 


.02285 


388.1 


8. 8879 



2. 70 
2.1,3 
2. si 
2. SO 
2.70 
2.64 
2.00 
1.20 
1.02 
2.30 
2. 84 
;;. L2 
3.61 
2. 74 
3.07 
2. 92 
2.64 
2.7,1 
2.58 
2.34 
2.61 
2.7 1 
1.73 
2.43 
4.92 
5.82 
2. 17 
2.27 
2.39 
2.92 
2.34 
1.92 
2.61 
3.21 

2.90 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 



Average 
kei net. 



0. 0006295 
.0006060 
.0006317 
.0006692 
.0006082 
.0006037 
.0006399 
.0002788 

.0003070 

.0005605 

.0001,273 
.0006001 
.0007764 

. 0006475 

.0000027 
.00007,0 1 
.0006062 
.0006225 
.0007,000 
.0005524 

.000,1 10 
.000 7-101 

.0003865 

.0007,420 

.0011365 

2921 

.0005531 

.0007,17,1 
.0007,327 

.0006539 
.0005466 

.000,132 
. 0005 7 54 

.0007107 



Percent- 
age of 
gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
t , tenin ni- 

on', m tr °g enin 
"" 1 "'" 1 '- kernels. 



( tliadln-piuE-glu- 
tenin mtrogi n 
(gram) in— 



Average 

kernel. 



Kernels 
on planl 



0. 12904 
.07,17,1 

. 13897 
. 18250 
.27003 

. 1400S 

. 15549 
. 06272 
. 11223 
. 16872 
.38505 
. 107132 
. 13713 
. 18540 
.04572 
.08176 
.04233 
.24150 
.28580 
. 23322 
34616 
,0843d 
.24847 
.22628 
.088;.5 
. 14'»13 
,69«88 
.20 r -lS 
.01332 
.4P52 
. 120: 7, 
. F550 
.13463 
. 09932 









1 os ii.oooil o n L9800 

2.:.2 .1 7,300 .12835 

l.oo .00112107, .05844 




1.92 .00047,02 


. 137,7,1 






1.77 .0003986 
1.34 .0003004 


.21432 

.0! 7 


1 18 0002;,: 1 


.03301 






1.40 .0002,00 
1.83 .0001321 
1.95 .00047,01 


. 16529 
. 19960 
.26465 














1.94 .0004307 


.0473s 













:::;:::::: :■:::::::::: :::::::::: 







.0006624 



.23100 



1.74 .0001011 



WEIGHT ()F AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.024 To 0.026 GRAM. 



17307, 

21X07 

2100,, 

27201 

28805 

37905 

40505 

48305 

33007 

7270O. 

X170S 

02200 

04103 

Average . 



0.02100 


03 


.02498 


377 


.02563 


108 


.02469 


i i , 


.027,12 


-7 


.027,7,7, 


37 


.02111 


170 


.027,13 


473 


.02300 


749 


.021X1 


591 


.02578 


287 


.02407 


10 


.027,13 


22 



.027,11 31, i. 



2.2881 

0.4172 
10. 4800 
19.1854 

2. 1851 
.9452 

4. 17,40 
12.0278 
lo 3966 

11.0X02 

7.7ioo:; 
1.1074 
. 5595 



.9866 



3.7,2 

2. 77, 

3. IX 
2.30 
2.91 
2.7,3 

2.82 
2.87 

2.7,0 
3.X0 
2.41 
2. 67 
2.67 






0.000X61,0 
.0000001 
.0008168 
.0005827 
.11007300 
.0006403 
.0006892 

.0007200 
.0000707 
.0009588 

.01100213 

.0006428 

.0003700 



0. 08044 
. 25709 
.33103 
. 13270 
.01330 
.02301 
.11716 
.34524 
.50*>38 
.7,0000 
. I7S33 
.02957 
.oiioi 



.000717,1 .22X10 



2.23 
2.11 
2.10 
1.46 
1.55 



2.19 

1.77 
l.ol 



0.0005486 0.07,102 

.0005271 .10X70 

.00033x2 .22008 

.0003MI3 .28010 

.0003X04 .033X7 



.0007,37,2 .00000 
.000:7,01 .21289 
.0001170 .31229 



1.64 .0004228 .12137, 



1.85 .0004634 .0 003 



\\ EIGHT OF AVERAGE KERNEL, 0.020 CHAM AND OVER. 



21211 

21703 

39506. ... 

10003 

33IOS 

37,000 

377,0s 
58505. . 
7210". 


0.02X00 
.02659 
.02869 

.02030 
.02000 
.0307,0 
.03177 
.02730 
.03003 

.02988 


10 

58 

07 

23 

S37 

302 

380 

273 

213 


0.2806 

1.3420 
1.9218 

.0700 

22.5848 

0.212O 
12.0728 
7.4516 

X.4413 


3.15 
2. 13 
2.03 
3.02 
2.31 
2.30 
2.21 
2.95 
3.36 


0.000«839 
.00065] 1 

.000s 101 

.0010010 
.0000230 

.00u 7 016 

.0007021 
.000X032 
.0013316 


0.00884 ' 




.0377s 




.03: ,31 
.02 130 . 


2.00 


0.0007,017, 


0.03030 


.52194 L. 






.21187 j 

.26680 

.21982 


1.66 
2.05 


.0005063 
.0006513 


. 15202 
.24730 


.28363 












10 


7. 2425 


2.81 


. 000S449 


.18126 ! 


1.92 


.0005829 


. 14667 



SOME PROPERTIES <»F THE WHEAT KERNEL. 



71 



Table 11. — Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to weight of average Jcernel. 

Crop of 1903. 













Per- 
cent 1 
age of 

j>ro- 
teid ni- 
trogen 
in ker- 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Per 
cent- 
age of 
glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 

tenin 
nitro- 


G lia <l i ii-]) 1 o s- 
glutenin nitro- 
gen (gram)in — 


Range of 

weights of 

average kernel 

(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels 
(grams i. 


Average 

kernel 


Ker- 
nels. 


Average 

kernel. 


Ker- 
nels 












nels. 




gen in 
ker- 




















nels. 






0.000 to 010.... 


4 


0.00915 


219 


2. 0334 


2. 76 


0.0002528 0.05618 


1.97 


ii.oooi.s77 


0.05312 


0.010 too or.'.... 


6 


.01118 


179 


2.0187 


2.98 


.0003326 .06276 


2.69 


.0002968 


.06752 


ii 012 to 0.014.... 


19 


.01323 


155. 7 


2.0510 


3. 12 


.0004120 .06687 


1.98 


.1)002(141 


.07499 


0.014 to 0.016.... 


27 


.01516 


232 


3.5480 


3.00 


.0004555 .10619 


1.76 


.0002805 


.00:120 


0.016 to 0.018.... 


69 


.01709 


305.9 


5.21)55 


2.93 


.001)5020 .IHils 


2.07 


.0003519 


. 13548 


01S to 020.... 


103 


.01901 


349.6 


6. 6327 


2. 88 


.011(15171'. .18039 


2.08 


.0003979 


. 15511 


ii 020 to 0.022.... 


64 


.02085 


386.6 


8. 1257 


2.60 


.in iir. 122 .20510 


1.92 


. 0003999 


.173.51 


0.022 to 024.... 


42 


. 02285 


388. I 


8. 8879 


2.90 


.0006624 .25166 


1.74 


.0004011 


. 15515 


n (124 to 0.026 ... 


13 


.02511 


316. 7 


7. 9866 


2.86 


.0007154 .22X111 


1 . 85 


.0004(151 


. 16903 


0.026 and over. . 


9 


.02988 


240. 3 


7.2425 


2. 81 


.OOO.S449 .18126 


1.92 


.0005829 


. 14667 



With an increase in the weight of the kernel, as shown by this 
table, there is an irregular increase in the number of kernels on the 
plant up to a point somewhat beyond the kernel of average weight, 
after which there is a decrease. The weight of the kernels on the 
plant seems to follow the same rule. The percentage of proteid 
nitrogen in the kernels decreases, in general, with the weight of the 
average kernel, while the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in 
the average kernel increases steadily. The grams of proteid nitro- 
gen in all the kernels on the plant increase up to the same point as 
do the number of kernels on the plant, and then decrease. 

Table 12 shows the summary of the analyses of the crop of 1903, 
ananged according to the grams of proteid nitrogen in the average 
kernel. All plants having less than 0.0003 gram of proteid nitro- 
gen form the first class, and the following classes increase with each 
0.0001 gram of proteid nitrogen. 

It is difficult to trace any relation between the grains of proteid 
nitrogen in the average kerne] and the number of kernels on the plant, 
or the weight of the kernels on the plant. The weight of the average 
kernel increases directly with the grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
kernel. The percentage of proteid nitrogen increases regularly 
with an increase in the grams of proteid nitrogen in the average 
kernel. The grams of proteid nitrogen in all the kernels on the plant 
show no definite relation to the grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
average kernel. 

It becomes evident from these results that selection of large, 
heavy kernels for seed would result in discarding the immature 
and unsound kernels, but that there would also be discarded many 
sound kernels, which, although small and of low specific gravity, 
would contain a high percentage of proteids. 



72 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Another effect of such selection, as indicated by the foregoing 
results, would be to increase the yield of grain from each plant 
when grown under the conditions that obtained in these experi- 
ments. What the effect would be upon the yield under ordinary 
field conditions these experiments do not indicate. 

On the other hand, selection based upon percentage of proteid 
nitrogen alone would not result in securing plants of greatest yield 
when raised under these conditions. It would, moreover, not result 
in obtaining plants producing the greatest amount of proteid nitro- 
gen, nor even of kernels containing the largest quantity of proteid 
nitrogen. 

Table 12. — Summary of analyses of plants, arranged according to grams of proteid nitrogen 
in average kernel. Crop of 190.3. 



Range of proteid nitrogen in 
average kernel (gram). 



Below 00030... 
0.00030 to 00040 
0.00040 to 0.00050 
0.00050 toO 00060 
0.00060 to 0.00070 
0.00070 to 0.00080 
00080 to 00090 
00090 to 00100 
0.00100 and over. 



Proteid 


Num- 


Number 


Weight ( 
of 


n grams) 




ber of 
analy- 


of ker- 
nels on 
plant. 




m average 
kernel 


Kernels 


Average 


(gram). 




on plant. 


kernel. 


0. 0002509 


14 


257.9 


3.9190 


0.01364 


. 0003602 


42 


266.7 


4. 6742 


.01628 


.0004537 


80 


409.2 


7. 5309 


.01811 


. 0005406 


116 


341.5 


6.7159 


.01908 


.0006409 


59 


310. 3 


6. 7257 


.02137 


.0007430 


24 


204.9 


4.5158 


.02110 


. 0008538 


9 


189.1 


4. 2480 


.02334 


. 0009588 


1 


591.0 


14. 6802 


.II2IM 


.0011578 


11 


244.9 


6. 6082 


. 02875 



Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 



1.96 
2.31 
2.54 
2.86 
3.07 
3.66 
3.79 
3.86 
4. 62 



0.06531 
. 09644 
. 1SC44 
. 18440 
. 19805 
. 15318 
. 15944 
. 56666 
. 27980 



It will be shown later that the determination of gliadin-plus-glutenin 
nitrogen is a safer guide to the bread-making value of wheat than is 
a determination of proteid nitrogen, but whether selection should be 
based upon the percentage of nitrogen or the total production of 
nitrogen by the plant, or upon the amount contained in the average 
kernel, is a question that can not be solved except by trial under field 
conditions. 

Some results of experiments with light and with heavy seed con- 
ducted on large field plots for several years may throw some light 
on this subject, and are given herewith. 

YIELD OF NITROGEN PER ACRE. 

It is important to know whether the absolute amount of nitro- 
gen per acre of grain raised is greater in light or in heavy wheat. 

If the absolute amount of nitrogen per acre is less in light than 
in heavy wheat the supposition would be justifiable that the kernels 
were immature or had been prematurely checked in their develop- 
ment. On the other hand, if the amount of nitrogen per acre is 
greater in the light wheat it would be reasonable to suppose that, as 
both had been raised under the same conditions, the light wheat had, 
in part at least, come from plants that possessed greater ability to 
acquire and elaborate nitrogenous material. 



YIELD OF NITROGEN PER ACRE. 



73 



To afford information on this point analyses were made of crops 
grown from light and from heavy seed. Records of the yields of the 
plots were kept in each case so that the actual amount of proteid 
nitrogen contained in an acre of each kind of wheat can he calculated. 
The number of grams of proteid nitrogen in 1,000 kernels of each seed 
and crop sample is also stated. The first samples separated, Nos. 78 
and 79 of the Turkish Red variety and 80 and 81 of the Big Frame 
variety, were taken from seed that had never before been treated 
in this way. When planted they produced the crops indicated in 
Table 13 by 78b, 79b, 80b, and 81b, respectively. Each of these 
crops was then separated into two portions, of which the light portion 
of the light wheat was retained for analyzing and planting, and the 
heavy portion of the heavy wheat likewise retained. Thus No. 383 
is the light portion of No. 78b, and No. 384 is the heavy portion of 
No. 79b. 

The accuracy of the records of relative yields of light and heavy 
seed harvested in 1902 being open to suspicion, samples of the same 
seed were sown again in the autumn of 1902 and harvested in 1903. 
The results from this test are stated at the bottom of the table under 
the heading "Check experiment." 

These experiments are to be understood as duplicating those of 
1902, which, as regards the relative yield of light and heavy wheat, 
should be accurate, although tried in 1903. The difference between 
this check experiment and the regular one of 1903 is that in the 
check experiment the seed of the crop of 1901 was used, while in the 
regular experiment hi 1903 the seed of the crop of 1902 was used. 



Table 13. — Crops grown from lit/Jit an I from heavy seedforfour years. 
SEED. 



Farm 
num- 
ber. 


Variety. 


Percentage of— 


Weight of 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in 1 ,000 
kernels 
(gram). 




Total Proteid Non- 
nitrogen. nitrogen. 1^*1^ 


1,000 ker- 
nels 

(grams). 


Relative 
weight. 


78 


Turkish Red 




17.24 




Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavv. 

Light 

Heavv. 

Light. 


79 


do 




30. 63 
15.57 




80 




2.45 i 2.00 
2.20 i 1.96 

3.12 3.10 
3.02 ! 2.93 

3.13 ' 2.82 
2.95 i 2.65 


0.45 
.24 
.02 
.09 
.31 
.30 


0. 3120 


81 
383 


do 

Turkish Red 


28.56 
27.11 
28. 47 
27.11 
28.09 


.5606 

.8401 
.8350 
.7642 
.7446 


384 
385 
386 


do 

Big Frame 

do 

Turkish Red 




do 















Light 




do 








Heavy. 
Light, 
Heavy. 
Light. 

Heavy. 

Light. 

Heavv. 

Light" 


957 


Turkish Red 


3.33 
3.06 
2.88 


2.87 -46 




956 


do 

Big Frame 

do 


2.86 
2.63 


.20 
.25 




952 






953 








CHECK EXPERIMENT. 

Turkish Red 














do 


:::::::::::: 


















do 





















7-1 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 13. — Crops grown from light and from heavy seed for four years — Continued. 

CROP. 



o 


Variety, 


O 

u 
o 

3 

s 


3 ^ 
■-- B 

as 

+J o 


Percentage of— 


c en 

bC -3 

C c 
t- 3 

•3 o 

Kg 

2 2 

££ 

Ph ft 


O ,J 

=3 ^7 

o J2 

„' 3 

OS 

t- 
-h bo 
o — - 

§s 

® to 

is* 


3 £ 
M 3 

.- c 
.■§,3 

O B. M 


3 

O 
t- 
bt 

t- 

00 


"S 


2 

•Z 03 
u 


o 

v~ 

■g . 

o 

— u 

p 


o 
*- 

s 

.S <t. 
l be 

o 

fin 


-a 

. '8 ■ 
o a> 
tn bi 

^2 


01 

£ d 

3 O 

3 *" 

B 
c3 


78 


Turkish Red 

do 


23.0 
29.5 
20.5 
25.1 
26. 7 
29.3 
21.2 
27.7 
L9.7 
18.0 

i.DSt 

Lost 
25.6 

21.3 

25.8 

20.8 

30. 9 
31.8 
23.9 

24. 2 


60.5 
61.5 
58.0 

(in.:, 
57.(1 
58.0 


3.20 
3.08 
3.13 
2.81 
2.35 
2.11 
3.30 
2.46 
2.15 
1.98 
3. 54 
2.44 


3.09 
2.94 
3.06 
2.59 
2.13 
1.94 
3.06 
2.24 
2.14 
1.87 
3.32 
2. 21 

3.51 
2.18 
2.14 
1.98 

1 . 95 
1.64 
1.79 
1.62 


0.11 
.14 

.07 
. 22 
.22 
.17 
.24 
.22 
.(11 
.11 
.22 
! 23 


45. 54 
52.04 
37.63 
39.01 
34. 12 
34.11 
38.92 
37.22 
25. 29 
20. 20 

53. 91 
27.86 
33.13 
24. 71 

36. 34 
31.29 
25.67 
23.52 






1900 
1900 
1900 
1900 
1901 

19(11 
1901 
1901 
1902 
1902 
1902 
1902 

1903 
1903 
1903 
1903 

1903 
1903 

1903 
1903 


78b 


79 


25.10 


0. 7379 


79b 


80 




Mtli 


81 


do 


24. 84 
26.19 
27.(11 
23.89 
28.82 


.6423 
.5581 

• .5238 
.7409 
.6451 


81b 


383 
384 

385 


Turkish Red 

do 


612 
613 
602 


386 


do 

Turkish Red 

do 


603 
621 








614 






19.56 
26.41 

22. 12 
23. 13 
19.82 
23.26 


.6494 
.5837 

.7764 
.5C42 
.4241 
. 4605 


604 




do 




611 


957 


Turkish Red 

do 

Big Frame 

do 

CHECK EXPERIMENT. 

Turkish Red 

do 

Big Frame 

do 




1240 


956 






1239 


952 






1248 


953 




1249 








1245 












'_' 












1252 












1254 











Comparing the analyses of the light and heavy seed in this table 
with those in the preceding tables, it will be noticed that the total 
and proteid nitrogen are both uniformly higher in the light seed. 
The nonproteid nitrogen is not so uniform as in the previous analyses, 
but the general tendency is the same. 

In the crop the high total and proteid nitrogen of the light seed is 
uniformly transmitted. There is no uniformity in the nonproteid 
nitrogen. As was to be expected, the heavy seed produced in the 
first two years the largest yields per acre. The quality of light or 
heavy weight as indicated in the resulting crop by weight of grain 
per bushel gave some indication of being transmitted. In 1900 
there was an absence of data on the subject, but in 1901 the heavy 
seed in each case produced grain having a greater weight per bushel 
than did the light seed. 

Turning to the column showing the absolute amount of proteid 
nitrogen produced per acre, it is very apparent that the heavy seed 
produced in 1900 considerably larger amounts of proteid nitrogen 
per acre than did the light seed, but in 1901 the difference was very 
slightly in favor of the light wheat, which advantage continued 
with the light wheat during the remaining years. 



YIELD OF NITROGEN PER ACRE. 75 

It would seem from these results that the quality of lightness, 
with its correlated qualities of high total and proteid nitrogen, is 
hereditary. The question then arises, Why should the light wheat 
accumulate more nitrogen per acre than the heavy wheat after the 
first generation ? 

A possible explanation for this is that the light seed from the first 
generation contained kernels whose lightness was due in some cases 
to immaturity, and in other cases to the individual peculiarity oi the 
plant on which they grew. The latter class transmitted this pecul- 
iarity in the crop, while the former became less conspicuous with 
each generation, on account of the lesser vitality and productiveness 
of the immature seed. 

A peculiar feature of these results is found in the fact that the 
yield of grain from the light seed approaches each succeeding year 
more nearly in quantity to that obtained from the heavy seed until, 
in 1903, it becomes greater. These two qualities of seed were 
raised on plots side by side, and every precaution was taken to obtain 
an accurate estimate of the yield of each. While it is probable that 
the results for 1903 are misleading, it is certainly significant that so 
little difference in yield exists after three years' selection in this way. 
Instead of the difference between the light and heavy seed becoming 
greater each year it is without doubt becoming less. 

In considering the relative yields of the light and heavy wheat, it 
must be borne in mind that the seeding was done with a drill set to 
deliver H bushels per acre of ordinary seed wheat. The result 
would be to deposit a larger number of kernels of light seed per acre 
than of heavy seed. In a season like that of 1903, when the rainfall 
was large and the weather moderately cool until harvest, there 
might be an advantage resulting from the thicker seeding, which 
may account for the greater yield from the light seed in that year. 

It is possible that the same cause may have operated in other 
years to increase the yields from the light seed, but it is not likely 
that it produced a very marked effect, because the seeding was a large 
one for Nebraska, and, the wheat being sown in the early fall, there 
was abundant opportunity for it to stool, and thus equalize the stand. 
It has never been observed that there was any difference between 
the plots in this respect. 

Taking, together, the results of 1902, which show a decrease in 
the weight of the kernels on a single head as the content of proteid 
nitrogen increases, the results of 1903, which show a slight decrease 
in the weight of the kernels from the plant, accompanying an increase 
in the percentage of proteid nitrogen, and the }4elds of the light and 
heavy seed for the four years beginning with 1900, there would 
appear to be a slight decrease in yield of grain, accompanying an 
increase in the percentage of proteid nitrogen. This loss in yield is 



76 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHPJAT. 

not sufficient to counteract the increase in nitrogen, and the result 
is to increase the production of proteids per acre. 

Viewed in the light of these various experiments, the selection of 
large, heavy wheat kernels for seed does not appear to be altogether 
unobjectionable, as in this case it resulted in a decreased production of 
proteids per acre, without a compensating increase in the yield of grain, 
when continued for a numbei of years. On the other hand, the selec- 
tion of the small, light seed is hardly to be recommended. In fact, 
selection based upon kernel size or weight is not a satisfactory method 
for permanently improving wheat. The individual plant should be 
taken as the basis for selection, and very large numbers should be 
handled. The figures in Table 8 show what great opportunity there 
is for securing not only kernels of high nitrogen content, but also 
plants giving at the same time an increased yield of grain and abun- 
dant production of proteids. If the average nitrogen content and 
yield of grain by plants be observed in this table, it will be seen 
that numerous plants may be selected that have not only a nitrogen 
content above the average, but also a greater yield of grain. While, 
therefore, it is probable that improvement in yield of grain can not 
be effected so rapidly where it is combined with improvement in 
nitrogen content as if the latter were neglected, yet present yields 
of wheat in Nebraska can be increased at the same time that the 
production of proteids is augmented. 

METHOD FOR SELECTION TO INCREASE THE QUANTITY OF 
PROTEIDS IN THE KERNEL. 

The following tables show the results of analyses of a total of 
forty-eight spikes of wheat. In the case of each spike one row of 
spikelets, for instance, row No. 1, was analyzed, and the other row 
of spikelets, which would then be row No. 2, was analyzed sepa- 
rately. In the case of the set of spikes forming Table 14 the total 
organic nitrogen was determined in both lots, and in the set com- 
prised by Table 15 the proteid nitrogen was determined. The last 
column shows the difference between the nitrogen content of the two 
rows of kernels. 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



77 



Table 14. — Analyses of twenty-fire spikes of wheat, showing their total organic nitrogt n. 



Number of spike. 


Percentage of total organic 
nitrogen. 


Number of spike. 


Percentage of tota 
nitrogen. 


organic 


Row 1. 


Row 2 DiiIer " 
lun -' ence. 


Row 1. 


Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


1 


3.14 
2.97 
2.89 
2.99 
2. 89 
2.82 
2.50 
3. 13 
3.11 
2. 76 
2.85 
3.26 
2.94 
3.45 


3.32 0.18 
3.15 .18 
2.99 , . 10 
3.21 .22 
2.82 .07 
2. SI .01 
2.76 .26 
3.11 .02 
3.18 .07 

2. Ml .04 
2.79 .06 
3.(17 .19 
3.07 .13 

3. 67 . 22 


is 


2. 83 

2.7S 
2.!ll 
2.98 
3.00 
2. SI 


2.79 
2.76 
3.03 
2. 89 
3.08 

2. 67 


0.04 


2 


23 

24 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 


. 02 


3 


.09 


■j 


.09 


8 


.(IS 


9 


. 17 


10 


3.03 2. OK 
2.65 2.79 
2.H2 2.84 
3.02 3.18 
3.02 2.80 


.13 


11 


.14 


12 


."2 


13 


. 16 


14. .. 


99 






16... 




.12 


17 

















Table 15. — Analyses of twenty-three spikes of wheat, showing their percentagt of vroteid 

nitrogt n. 



Number of spike. 


Percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Number of spike. 


Percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Row 1. 


Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Row 1. 


Row 2. 


Differ- 
ence. 


4 . . 


2.90 3.12 


0.22 
. 11 
.11 
.22 
.11 
.OS 
.10 
.36 
.03 
.05 
.17 
.12 
.04 


34 


2. si; 
2.:;:; 
2.88 
2. 43 
3. 15 
3.46 
2.45 
2.73 
3.42 
2.47 


3.02 
2. 52 
2.85 
2.45 
3. 14 
3.34 
2.59 
2.68 
3.61 
2.57 


0. 16 


5 


2.97 
2.68 
2.54 
2. 12 
2.42 
3.01 
2.35 
2.72 
2.49 
2.92 
2. 60 
3.41 


2.86 
2.79 
2.76 
2. 53 
2.50 
2.91 
2.71 
2.75 
2. 44 
3.09 
2.48 
3.37 


35 


.19 


20 

21 


36 

37 

38 


.03 
.02 




.01 


26 

27 

28 

29 


39 

40 

41 

42 


.12 
.14 
.05 
.19 


30 


43 


.07 


31 

32 

33 


Average 




2.77 


2.82 


.11 



It will readily be seen that the analyses of the rows agree very 
closely, the extreme difference being 0.22 per cent, and the average 
difference being 0.f2 per cent, in the total nitrogen. If, therefore, 
one row of spikelets were to be used for seed and the other were 
analyzed, it is quite evident that a very accurate estimate of the 
nitrogen content of the kernels used for seed would be obtained. In 
the determination of proteid nitrogen there is an extreme difference 
of 0.36 per cent in one case, but in the main the differences are small. 
As will be shown later, the variation in the proteid nitrogen content 
of individual plants is so great that even this maximum difference 
would cause no confusion when selecting plants for reproduction. 

It is very desirable to have for analysis a larger sample than can 
be obtained from one spike. It has therefore been attempted to 
ascertain whether a sample consisting of on%-half the whole number 
of spikes on a plant would afford a fair estimate of the composition 
of the other kernels on the remainder of the spikes. The plants 
whose spikes were analyzed were grown in hills 5 inches apart 



78 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



each way, with one seed in each hill. Each plant was harvested 
separately and the spikes from each placed in a separate envelope. 
The following table gives the results, lot 1 in each case being com- 
posed of the kernels from one-half the number of spikes on a plant, 
and lot 2 of kernels from the remaining spikes. 

Table 16. — Analyses of twenty-one plants, showing total nitrogen and proteid nitrogen. 



Number oi plant. 


Percentage of total nitrogen. 


Percentage of proteid 
nitrogen. 


Lot 1. 


Lot 'J. 


Differ- 
ence. 


Lot 1. 


^2. rr 


1 


2.65 

3.01 
3.01 
2.82 
3.06 
2.94 
2.84 
3.21 
2.98 
2.59 
2.81 
3.47 
2.61 
2.54 
2.71 
2.85 
2.99 
2.78 
2. 7s 
2.79 


2.91 
3.02 
2. 83 

3.10 
2.97 
2.56 
3.03 
3.05 
2.87 
2.66 
2.62 
3.62 
2. 54 
2. 45 
2. 87 
3.01 
3. 13 
2.77 
2.80 
2.71 


0.26 2.51 
.01 2.77 
. 24 2. 69 
.28 5» 63 


2.69 


0.18 


2 


2.76 
2.57 
2.83 
2.70 
2.42 
2.86 
2.84 
2. 70 
2.57 
2.52 
3.35 
2.42 
2.29 
2.71 
2.75 
2.91 
2.33 


.01 
.12 
.20 
.22 
.09 
.20 
.01 
.11 
.23 
.07 
.31 
.02 
.04 
.46 
.02 
.06 
9.K 


3 


4 


5 


. 09 
.38 
.19 
.16 
.11 
.07 
.19 
.15 
.07 
.08 


2.92 

2.51 
2.66 
2.83 
2.59 
2.34 
2.59 
3.04 
2. 14 
2.95 


15 

7 

9 

10 

11-. 

12 


13 


14 


15 


16 


. 16 2. ''.i 


17 


.16 


2.73 


18 


.11 
.01 
.02 
.08 


2.85 
2.61 
2.60 
2.51 


If) 


20 


2. 57 : . 03 
U.4s .03 


21 














.14 






.13 











The above table shows a maximum difference of 0.38 per cent in 
the content of total nitrogen of the two lots of spikes from one plant, 
and of 0.46 per cent in the content of proteid nitrogen. The aver- 
age difference is only 0.14 per cent and 0.13 per cent, respectively. 

These tables give unmistakable evidences that the average com- 
position of a spike of wheat may be judged from the analysis of a 
row of its spikelets, and that the average composition of all of the 
spikes of a wheat plant is shown by an analysis of one-half the num- 
ber. In practice it is better to take as the sample for analysis one 
row of spikelets from each spike, and the remaining row of spikelets 
from each spike for planting. 

In order to ascertain what variation occurs between the several 
spikes on a single wheat plant, anal} T ses were made of each spike 
from a number of plants. On some plants there were more spikes 
than on others, but every spike on each plant was analyzed. In the 
following tabulation of these analyses the percentage of proteid 
nitrogen is stated. 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



79 



Table 17. — Analyses of spikes of wheat, showing difference in proteid nitrogt n. 



Spike. 


Percentage oi proteid nitrogen. 


Plant 23. 


Plant 24. 


Plant 2.5. 


Plant 26. 


Plant 27. 


Planl 2C 


1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
7. 
8. 
9. 
10. 




2.33 

2; 69 
2. 37 
2.36 
2.15 
2.31 
2.09 
2.71 
2.32 
2.37 


2. 46 

2.73 
2.35 
2.11 
2.19 
2.21 
2.53 


2.31 
2. 36 
2.47 
2. 59 
2.35 
2. 39 
2.39 
2.60 
2. .',4 
2.83 


2.73 
3.02 
2.80 

2.60 
2. 53 
2.37 
2. 72 
2.37 
2.61 
2.45 


3.22 
3.24 
3.02 
3.31 


2.38 
2.60 
3.03 
3.00 

2. 3 1 
2.71 
2.21 




























2.60 

2.30 








Maximum 

Average 

Minimum. . . . 

Greatest dif- 
ference 






2.69 
2.37 
2.09 

.60 


2.73 
2.37 
2.11 

.62 


2.83 
2.48 
2.31 

.52 


3.02 
2. 62 
2.37 

.65 


3.31 

3.20 
3.02 

.29 


3.03 

2.57 
2.21 

. 82 



These results show that there may be large differences between 
the proteid nitrogen content of spikes on the same plant. They do 
not, however, indicate that the determination of the average com- 
position of the kernels on a plant is not a safe guide for selecting 
breeding stock. If the plant is the unit in reproduction, whether the 
plant reproduces itself from one seed or another does not affect its 
hereditary qualities in very marked degree. 

It is evident, from a comparison of the variations that occur in the 
composition of the spikes from a single plant, and of the kernels on a 
single spike, that it is impossible to do more than obtain a reasonably 
close estimate of the composition of the kernels either on a part or on 
the whole of a plant. It therefore becomes desirable to obtain as 
closely as possible the average composition of the unit of reproduction. 
If the plant as a whole, and not any particular part, is this unit, the 
average composition of all of the kernels on the plant is a much safer 
guide as a basis for selection than is the average composition of the 
kernels of any part of it. One row of spikelets from each spike 
should therefore give the best sample for analysis. 

In Table 18 is given a statement of the percentage of proteid 
nitrogen in the dry matter of the kernels on a row of spikelets of 800 
spikes of wheat of the Turkish Red variety. These spikes were taken 
from a field of wheat, and were selected with reference to length of 
head, plumpness of kernel, uprightness of straw, freedom from rust, 
etc. They are therefore not spikes in which high nitrogen content is 
likely to be due to immaturity or arrested development/' Variations 
in the nitrogen content of different plants may in some degree be due 
to a larger or smaller supply of available nitrogen, although all were 
taken from the same field. Variations due to climate are, of course, 
precluded, as all grew during the same season. 

«In practice undeveloped kernels a:e discarded. 



80 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 18. — Variations in content of proteids. 





Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— i 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of — 


Record 
number. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N. ■ 5 7) 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
X. 5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N. x5.7). 


1 


2.25 
3.04 
2.45 
3.14 
2.86 
2. 83 
3.67 
3.42 
2.36 
2.28 
2.98 
3. 51 
3.63 
2.48 
2.30 
3.48 
3.55 
3.31 
2.30 
2.52 
2.93 
3.25 


12.82 

17.33 

L3.96 

17.1111 

lii.::u 

16. 13 

20.92 

19.49 

13. 45 

13.00 

L6.99 

21). Ill 

20.69 

14.14 

13.11 

19.84 

20. 23 

18.87 1 

13.11 

14.36 

in. 70 

18.52 ! 


78 


3.40 
3. 33 
3.79 

3. 63 

2. OS 


19. 38 
18.98 
21.60 
20. 69 

15. 28 


155. 


1.99 
3.03 
2.07 
2.75 
2.82 
3.06 
2. 54 
3.33 
2.73 
2.47 
3.22 
2.80 


11 37 


2 


79 


150 


17.20 


3 


80 


157. . 


11.87 


4 


81 


158... 


15 64 




82 

83 


159... 


16 07 


6 


160... 


17 44 




84 


2. 10 
2.62 
2.87 
2.89 
2.14 
3.56 
3.76 


14.02 
14.93 
16.49 

16.86 
13.91 

2ll.2d 
21.43 


161... 


14 48 


8 


85 


162. . 


18 98 


9 


86 


163. 


15.56 


10 


87 


164 . 


14 08 


11 


88 


165 


18 35 


12 


89 


166... 

167 


15 96 




90 




11 


91 


168 


3.59 
2.52 
2.72 
3.28 
2.74 
3.07 
3. 75 
3.46 
3.09 
3.56 


20 46 


15 


92 

93 

94 


3.41 
2.30 


19.44 
13.11 


169 


13 72 


16... 


170... 


15 50 


17.. .. 


171... 


18 70 


18... 


95 




172 


15. 62 


19... 


96 

97 

98 


2.75 
4.07 
3.28 
3.24 
2.15 
3.12 
3.00 
2.87 
3.58 
2.61 
2.01 
2.68 
3.10 
2.58 
2.76 
4.30 
2.89 
2.59 
2.68 
1.71 
2.59 
3.31 


15. 67 

23. 20 
18.70 
18.47 
12. 25 
17.78 
17.10 
16.36 
20.41 
14.88 
11.46 
15.28 
17.67 
14.71 
15.73 

24. 51 
16.47 
14.67 
15.28 

9.75 
14. 75 
18.87 


173 


17.54 


20... 


174 


"1.43 


21 . 


175 


19.74 


22 . 


99 


176 


17.67 


23 . 


100 

101 

102 

103 

104 

105 

106 

107 


177 


20.34 


24 


2.84 
2.73 
3.55 
2. 33 
2.65 
2.82 
2.70 
1.84 
3.10 
2.86 
2.16 
2.58 
3.22 
3.49 
2.76 
2. 96 
2. so 
3.50 
3.05 
2.88 

2. 75 
2.61 
2.50 
3.10 
3.17 
2.86 
2.80 
3. 65 
2.ss 
3.21 
2.96 

3. 84 
3.38 
3. 11 
3.21 
3.06 
3.02 
1.78 
2.67 
3.39 
2. 49 
2. 58 
2.12 
2. 64 
2.46 
2.35 
2.93 
2.32 
2.20 
2. 58 
2. 58 
3.22 


16. 19 
15.56 
20.23 
13.28 

15. 11 

16. 07 

15. 39 
10.49 
17.07 
16.30 
12.31 
14.71 
18.35 
L9.89 
15.73 
16. 87 
16. 30 
19.95 
17.38 
16.42 
15.67 
14.88 
14.25 
17.67 
18.07 
16.30 
15.96 
20.80 
16.42 
18.30 
16.87 
21.89 
19. 27 
17.73 
18.30 
17.44 
17.21 
10.13 
15. 22 
19. 32 
14.19 
14.71 
12.08 
15.05 
14.02 
13.39 
16.70 
13.22 
12.54 
14.71 
11.71 
18.35 


17S 




25 


179 :.. 


3.85 
3.57 
2.66 
2.76 
2.05 
3.77 
2.70 
3.97 
2.98 
2.36 
2. 63 
3.24 
3. 24 
3.12 
2.40 
3.43 
.3. 33 
2.71 
2.85 
3.18 
2.98 
3.23 


21.95 


26 


180 


20.38 


27 


181 


15.18 


28 


1S2 


15. 74 


29 . 


183 


11.73 


30... 


1S4 


21.53 


31.. 


108 


L85 


15.43 


32 


109 


186 


22.63 


33 . 


110 

Ill 


187 


17.03 


34 . 


188 


13.48 


35 . 


112 

113 


189 


15. 03 


36 . 


190 


18.52 


37.. 


114 


191 


18.52 


38 


115 


192 


17.80 


39 


116 


193 


13.72 


40 


117 


194 


19.58 


41 


118 


195 


18.99 


42 


119 


2.17 
2.88 


12.37 
16.42 


196 


15.46 


43... 


121) 


197 


16.27 


44 


121 


198 


18. 13 


45 


122 

123 

124 

125 

126 


1.33 
2.54 
3.20 
2.04 
2.34 
2.89 
2.98 
2.85 
2.99 
3.18 


7.58 
14.48 
18.24 
11.63 
13.34 
16.47 
16.99 
16.24 
17.04 
18.13 


199 


17.03 


46 


200 


18.46 


47 


201 




48 


202 


3.12 
3.07 
3.90 
2.41 
3.44 
2.73 
3.20 
3.81 
2.94 
2.89 
2.96 
3.30 
3.09 
3.79 
3.33 
2.86 
2.58 
2. 71 
3.19 
3.98 
2.93 
3.30 
3.65 
3.54 
3.11 
2.71 
3.39 
2.96 
2.54 
3.11 


17. S3 


49 . 


i 203 


17.51 


50 


127 

128 


204 


22.24 


51 


205 


13. 74 


52 . 


129 


206 


19.62 


53 . 


L30 


207 


15. 58 


54 


131 

132 


208 


18.30 


55 . 


209 

210 

211 

212 


21.76 


56 . 


133 






16.79 


57 . 


134 







10.52 


58.. 


135 






16.91 


59 


136... 






18.86 


60 . 


137 

138 

139 


2.13 
3.08 
1.37 


12. 14 
17.56 

7.81 


214 


17.62 


01 


215 


21.63 


62 


216 


18. 99 


63... 


140 


217 


16.30 


64 


141 

142 


2. 57 
2.75 
3.03 
3.17 
2.09 
2. 75 
2. 12 
2.68 
2. 25 
2.01 
1.51 
1.64 
2.93 
2.85 


14. 65 
15.67 
17.27 
18.07 
11.91 
15.07 
13.79 
15.28 
12.82 
14.88 
8.61 
9. 35 
10.70 
16. 24 


218 


14.72 


65 


' 219 


15.45 


66... 


143 


220 

221 


'8.22 


67 


144 

115 


22.70 


68 


222 


16.71 


69 


140 


223 


18.86 


70 . 


147 


224 


20.82 


71 


IIS 

149 


225 

226..- 


20.23 


72 . 


17.73 


73 


150 

151 


! 227 


15.46 


74 


228 


19.36 




152 

153 

154 


229 

230 

231 


16.88 


76 


14.46 






:::::::::: 


17.73 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



81 





Table 18. — Variations in 


content c 


/ proteids- 


—Continued 








Percentage of— 


Record 

number. 


Percentage of — 


Record 

number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N.X5.7). 


Proteid 

nitrogen Proteids 
in water- (proteid 
free 1 N. x 5.7). 
material. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
materia I 


Proteids 

(proteid 
N.X5.7). 


232 


3.11 
3.31 
3.23 
3.65 
3. L8 
4.87 
2.69 
2.59 
3. 52 
2.76 
2.96 
3.47 
3.30 
3.64 
3. 75 
3.50 
3.64 
3.21 
3.11 
3.46 
2. 54 
3.63 


17.73 
18. 92 
IS. 43 
20.82 
18.17 
27.79 
15.38 
14.77 
20.12 
15. 75 
16. 89 
19.78 
18. 83 
20. 77 
21.39 
19.95 
20.78 
18.32 
17.76 
19.73 
14.52 
20.71 


309 


3.74 
3.15 
2.99 
:;. is 
3.52 
3.16 
2.75 
3.35 
3.42 
2.01 
2. 86 
2.98 
3.42 
2.54 
3.42 
3.18 
3.45 


21.36 

18.01 

17.07 

19.88 i 

211. 11 

is. ii3 

15.68 ; 

19.13 

19.54 

11.50 

16.33 

17.00 

19. 54 

14.53 

19. 54 

18.16 

19.70 


386 


2. 52 
2. 73 
3.05 
2.95 
3.22 
3.26 
2.93 
2.70 
2.77 
2.98 
2.28 


15.07 


233 


310 


387 


15.59 


234 


311 


388 


17.41 


235 


312 


389 


16. S7 


236 


313 


390 


L8.36 


237 


314 


391 


IS. 60 


238 




392 


10.74 


239 


316 


393 


15.41 


240 


317 


394 


15.81 


241 


318 




16.99 


242 


319 


396 


13.02 


243 


320 


397 




241 


321 


398 




245 


32'' 


399 


3.09 

3.35 
3. 36 
2.32 
3. 03 
3.30 
3. 75 
2.43 
3.79 
3.63 
3.59 
3.26 
3.15 
3.63 
3.77 
3.13 
2.44 
3. 23 
3.79 
3.05 
2.85 
3. 73 

2. 53 
3. 53 

3. 14 
2.61 
3.29 
3.08 
3.06 
2.59 
3.03 
2.81 
3.20 
3.00 
3.12 
2.85 
3.53 
2.88 
3.12 
2.66 
2.98 
2.35 
2.93 
3.22 
2.50 
2.37 
2.37 
3.75 
2.86 
3. 13 
2.76 
3.61 
2. 92 
3.17 
3.15 
3.14 
2.62 
2.71 
3.14 
3.18 
2.60 
3.91 


17.65 


246 


323 


400 


19.12 


"17 


324 


401 


19.20 


248 


325 


402 


13.26 


249 


326 




17.31 


250 


327 


3.44 
3.60" 
2.87 
2.61 


19.64 
20.55 
16.39 
14.93 


404 


18. 83 


251 


328 


405 


21. 43 


252 


329... 


406 


13. 90 


253 


330 


407 


21.63 


254 


331 


408 


20.74 




3.02 
3.31 


17.26 
18.88 


332 


2.57 
3. 25 
2.61 
2.81 
3.35 
2.88 
4.95 
3.33 
2.73 
2.97 
2.60 
2.50 
2.93 
2.55 

2.44 
2.87 
2.65 
2.63 
3.31 
3.04 
3.10 
2.72 
2.83 
2.91 
2.36 
2.33 
2.97 
2.88 
2.94 
3.03 
3.49 
2.91 
3.49 
3.16 
3.37 
3.06 
3.33 
3.09 
2.98 
3.30 
2.86 
3.15 
3.40 
2.59 
3.46 
2.74 
3.09 
2.35 
3.45 
3.22 
2.96 
3. 55 
3.79 


14.68 
IS. 56 
14.92 
15.70 
19.11 
16.45 
28.23 
19.01 
15.61 
16.94 
14.82 
14.27 
16.71 
14.57 
14. 55 
13.92 
16.39 
15.18 
15.03 
18.90 
17.38 
17.72 
15.53 
16.18 
16.61 
13.47 
13. 60 
16.95 
16.45 
16.77 
17.28 
19.89 
16.62 
19. 94 
18.04 
19. 23 
17.47 
19.02 
17.64 
17.04 
18.84 
16.33 
17.97 
19.89 
14. 76 
19.76 
15.115 
17.64 
13.42 
19.67 
18.40 
16.88 
20.26 
21.62 


4(19 


20.47 


256 


333 


410 


is. 63 


257 


334 


411 


17.95 


258 


3.37 
3.84 
1.93 
3.4!) 
3.19 
3.24 
3.36 
3. 29 
3.10 
3.18 
4.10 
3.20 
3.36 
3.39 
3.13 
3.39 
3.56 
3.32 
3.15 
2. 85 
3.11 
3.7S 
3.70 
3.26 
3.01 
3.85 
3.71 
3.S7 

3. 55 
3.86 
2. 82 
2. 52 
4.00 
2.23 
4.15 
2.63 

2. 56 
3.05 
3.93 
1.99 


19.24 
21.89 
11.03 
19. 92 
18.21 
18. 48 
19.20 
18.80 
17.70 
18.18 
23. 39 
18.29 
19.19 
19.34 
17.88 
19.78 
20. 34 
18.96 
17.95 
16.26 
17.77 
21.60 
21.10 
18.60 
17.19 
22.00 
21.20 
22.1)7 
20.26 
22. 04 
16.09 
14.40 
22. 81 
12.73 
23. 68 
15.04 
14.60 
17.41 
22. 44 
11.35 


335 

336 


412 


20.70 


•'.",'i 




21.51 


260 


337 


414 


17.89 


261 


338 


415 


13.93 


262 


339 


416 


18.44 


263 


340 


417 


21.65 


264 


341 


418 


17.39 


265 


342 

343 


419 


16.28 


266 


420 


21.27 


•'fir 


344 


421 


14.45 


268 




.]■;■> 


20.12 


269 


346 


423 


17.90 


270 


347 


424 


14.93 


271 


348 




is. si 


272 


349 


426 


17.60 


273 


350 


427 


17. 46 


274 


351 :. 


428 


14. SO 


275 


352 


429 


17.31 


276 


353 


431 


16.06 


277 


354 


18.25 


278 




432 


17.11 


279 


356 


433 


17.80 


280 


357 


434 


16.28 


281 


35S 


435 


20.14 


282 


359 


436 

437 

438 

439 

440 

441 

442 


16.44 


283 


360 


17.82 


284 


361 


15. 20 


285 


362 


16.99 


286 


363 


13.44 


2S7 


364 


16.72 


288 




17.98 


289 


366... 


443 


14.30 


290. 


367 


444 


13. 56 


291 


368 


445 


13. 51 


292 


369 


446 


21.37 


293 


370 


447 


16.33 


294 


371 


448...'. 


16.67 


295. 


372 


449 


15. 76 


296. . 


373 


450 


20.62 


297. 


374 ■ 


451 


16.68 


298 




452 


is. 07 


299 


3.67 
3.06 
3.08 
2.68 


20.96 
17.49 
17.61 
15.28 


376... 




17.96 


300 


377 


454 


17.92 


301 


378 




14.95 


302 


379 


456 

457 

458 


15.47 


303 


380 


17 92 


304. 


2.23 
3.07 
2. 50 

3.19 
2.84 

89— No. 


12.74 

17. 52 
14.30 
18.20 
16.22 


381... 


18.20 


305 


382 


459 


14. 84 


306. 


383... 


460 

461 


22. 29 


307 


384 




31 is 




1 462 


2.39 


13.64 


278 


78—05 — 


-6 





82 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 18. — Variations in content of proteids — Continued. 





Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 
N. x 5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N.X5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in wa ter- 

free 
material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

N. 5.7). 


463 


2.49 
1.98 
3.32 
2.98 
2.89 
2.95 
2.74 
2.80 
2.24 
2.49 
2.76 
2.80 
2.95 
2. 52 
2.95 
3.15 
2.27 
2.72 
3.04 
3.15 
2.60 
3.45 
2.59 
2.68 
3.01 
2.41 
3.45 
2.46 
2.87 
2.06 
3.18 
2.45 
2.36 
2.52 
2.84 
2.82 
2.97 
3.06 
2.64 
2.72 
2. 31 
3.06 
2.71 
2.49 
3. 13 
2.89 
3.20 
2.93 
3.61 
2.71 
2.86 
2.41 
2. 27 
3.28 
2.36 
3.64 
2. si 
2.54 
2.68 
3.12 
2.99 
1.93 
2.51 
1.71 
3. 15 
2.35 
2. 88 
2.64 
2.! 17 
2. 75 
3 22 
■2. 95 
3.03 
2. 57 
2. 88 

2. Ill 

3. 70 


14.24 
11.29 
18. 97 
17.01 
16. 48 ! 
16. 82 1 
15. 62 ! 
15.97 

12. 79 | 
14.22 ; 

15. 78 
15.97 
16.83 
14.39 
16.85 
18.00 
12.96 
15.53 1 
17.38 
17.97 
14.86 
19.71 
14.81 
15.31 
17.18 
13.77 
19.70 
14.02 

16. 40 
11:78 ! 
18. 16 
13.97 ' 
13.45 
14.38 
16.21 
16.08 i 
16.95 
17.48 
15.09 
15. 56 | 
13.19 ! 
17.48 
15.46 
14.24 
17.85 
16.51 
18.29 
16.71 
20.59 
15.45 
16.33 

13. 79 

12. 98 
L8.75 
13.49 
20.75 
16.03 

14. 48 
15.28 
17.7!» 
17.05 
11.04 
14.35 

9.79 
17.99 

13. 42 
1(1.44 
15.06 
16.94 

15. 73 
18.37 
16.82 

17. 29 

14. till 
16.47 
15.09 
21. 46 


540 


3.17 
3.09 
3. 33 
3. 50 
1.29 
2.10 
2.54 
2.73 
3.01 
2.50 
2.84 
2.99 
2.30 
3.21 
2.91 
3. 16 
3.02 
3.30 
3.25 
2.94 
3.32 
3.00 
1.12 
2.36 
3.83 


18. 12 
17.66 
19.01 
19.96 

7.37 
11.98 

14. 49 

15. 59 
17.21 
14. 30 
16.20 
17.08 
13.11 , 
18. 35 

16. 59 
18.06 
17.26 
18.86 1 
18. 58 
16.78 
18.93 

17. 13 
6.40 

13.49 
21.84 


617 


3.12 
2.67 
3.59 
2.68 
2.24 
3.19 
3.52 
2.67 
2.68 
2.69 
2.88 
3.68 
3.47 
2.48 
3.39 
3.22 
1.64 
2.10 
3.42 
3.08 
2.77 
3.54 
3.15 
2.82 
3.37 
2.57 
3.35 
3.41 
2.44 
3.77 
2.82 
2.53 
2.56 
2.59 


17.83 


4<>4 


541 


61S 


15.27 


465 


542 


619 


20.49 


466 


543 


620 


15.30 


467 


544 


621 


12.79 


468 


545 


622 


18.23 


469 


546 


623 


20.09 


471) 


547 


624 


15.27 


471 


548 


625 


15.30 


472 


549 


626 


15.38 


473. 


5.50 


627 


16.44 


474 


551 


628 


21.01 


475 


552 


629 


19.82 


476 


553 


630 


14. 16 


477 


554 


631 


19.35 


478 


555 


632 


18.41 


479 


556 


633 


9.38 


480. 


557 


634 


11.99 


481 


558 


635 


19.52 


482 


559 


636 


17.61 


4S.3 


560 


637 


15.79 


484 


561 


638 


20.21 


485 


562 


639 


18.00 


486 


563 


640 


16.10 


487 


564 


641 


19.26 


488 


565 


642 


14.68 


489 


566 


3.49 
3.08 
2.17 
3.03 
3.20 
2.52 
3.12 
2.52 
3.25 
3.17 
2.52 
3.09 
2.73 
3. 35 


19.49 
17.57 
12.39 
17.29 
18.27 
14.37 
17.82 
14.41 
18.53 
18.10 
14.40 
17.61 
15. 60 
19.10 


643 


19.14 


490 


567 


644 


19.47 


491 


568 


645 


13. 91 


492 


569 


646 


21.54 


493 


570 


647 


16. OS 


494 


571 


648 


14.47 


495 


572 


649 


14.63 


496 


573 


650 


14.82 


497 


574 


651 




498 


575 


652 


2.83 
2.50 
2.59 
3.21 
2.56 
2.55 


16.19 


499 


576.... 


653 


14.31 


500 


577 


654 


14.81 


501 


578 




18.30 


502 


579 


6.56 


14.61 


503 


■580 


657 


14.57 


504 


581. .. . 


3.79 
2. 59 
3.13 
3.49 
3.05 
3.27 
2.56 
2.83 
2.84 
2.86 
3.06 
3.20 
2. 88 
3.32 
3.18 
3.09 
3.32 
2. 34 
3.12 
2.97 
2.08 
3.64 
2.56 
2. 53 
2.56 
3.13 
3.01 
3.05 

2. 75 
3. 51 
3.00 
3.26 

3. 84 
2.77 
2.72 
3.72 


21.61 
14.77 
17.86 
19.91 
17.40 
18.65 
14.60 
16. 17 
16.20 
16. 31 
17.44 
18. 29 
16.47 
18.93 
18.17 
17.66 
18.93 
13.39 
17.81 
16.97 
11.91 
20.77 
14.62 
14.45 
14.60 
17.85 
17.20 
17.41 
15. 72 
20.05 
17. 15 
18.62 
21.92 
15.79 
15. 52 
21.22 


658 




505 


582 




2.92 
3.26 
2.55 
2.50 
2.82 
2.80 
3.33 
2.35 
2.31 
2.50 
4.36 
6.33 
2.32 
4.82 
3.39 
3.24 
3.41 
3.11 
2.51 
3.09 
2.48 
2.30 
3.36 
2.49 
2.70 
3.59 
4.04 
2.79 
2.83 
2.65 
2.68 
3.38 
3.04 
2. si 
2.35 


16.70 


51 16 


583 


660 


IS. eo 


507 


584 


661 


14.56 


508 


585 


662 


14.26 


.",1 1< i 


586 


663 


16. 11 


510 


5s7 


664 


15.98 


511 


588 


665 


19.01 


512 


589 


666 


13. 40 


513 


590 


667 


13. 20 


514 


591 

592 




14.30 


515 


669 


24.86 


516 


593.. 


670 

671 


36.12 


517. 


594 


13.23 


518 




672 


28.15 


519 


596... 


19. 35 


520 


.597 


674 

675 

071. 

677 


18.48 


521 


598 


19.44 


522 


599 


17.73 


523 


600 


14. 36 


524 . 


601 


678 

679 


17.65 


525 


602 


14.17 


526... 


603 


680 

681 

682 

683 


13. 13 


.".27 


604 


19.17 


528 


605 


14.20 


.72'.! 


606 


1.5. 41 


530 


607 


684 

685 

686 

687 

688 

689 

690 

691 

692 

693 


20.51 


531. 


608 


23. 06 


532... 


609 


15.90 


533 


610 


16.13 


534. 


611 


15.12 


535. . 


612 


15. 28 


536 


613.. 


19.26 


537... 


614 


17.33 


538 


615 


16.04 


539 


616 


13.76 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN KERNEL. 



83 



Table 18. — Variations in content ofproti ids -Continued. 





Percentage of — 


Record 

number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 
number. 


Percentage of— 


Record 

nunioer. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in water- 
free 

material 


Proteids 

( proteid 
N. 5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 

f ee 
material. 


Proteids 

(proteid 
N. • 5.7). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in water- 
free 

material. 


Proteids 
(proteid 

y. 5.7). 


694 


2. 15 
2.92 


12.23 
16.69 


7 

731 

7 2 

733 

7 4 


2.09 
3.18 
2.41 
2.06 
2.76 
2.09 
2.29 
1.61 
2.01 

2. 85 
1.87 
1.75 

3. 57 
2.63 
1,97 
2.98 
1.77 
2.79 
1.83 
2.29 
2.22 
3.48 
3.48 
1.33 
3. 55 
2.43 
2.30 
2.14 
1.67 
2.14 
3.72 
2.47 
2.93 
2.02 
2.18 
2.20 


11. S2 

18. 18 
13. 78 

11.77 
15.73 
11.96 

13.09 
9.20 
11.44 
Hi. 20 
10.71 
9.99 
20.36 
15.02 

1 1 . 23 
16.99 
10.10 
L5-. 95 
10.44 
13. 06 
12.60 

19. 85 
19. s7 

7. 5.3 
2(1.2!) 
13. '.'(I 
13.15 

12. 24 
9. 54 

12.25 
21.21 
14.12 
10.72 
11.56 
12.47 
12.57 


766 


2. 87 
2. 22 
2.45 
2. 37 
1.37 
1.(12 
2.00 
1.73 
2. 32 
1.88 
2. 28 
2.80 
1.98 
2.35 
2.85 
2. 79 
2.64 
2. SI 
1.92 
2.25 
3.29 
2.95 
2.13 
2.20 
2.86 

3.02 

2.16 
2.32 
2. 82 
2.48 
2.45 

2:20 

2.95 

2.18 
2.02 


16 41 


395 


76, 


12 0!) 


i I'lii 


768 

7fi!' 

7;o 

771 


13 98 


697 

09 

69? 


2.11 
3.03 
2.64 
4.10 
2.51 
2.27 
2. 33 
2.43 
2.48 
1.87 
3.07 
2.12 
1.87 
2.10 
2.08 
2.61 
2.20 
2.16 
3.23 
2.77 
2.38 
3.14 
2.16 
1.80 
2. 14 
2.16 
2.18 
2.04 
2.32 
2.19 
1.79 
2.49 
2.92 


12.07 
L7.29 
15.09 
23. 42 
14.33 
12.96 
13. 34 ' 
13. 94 ; 
14.18 1 
10. 69 | 

17. 52 
12.09 
10. 67 
12. 00 
11. 87 
14.88 
12.58 
12.32 

18. 44 
15.81 
13.61 : 
17.91 
12.35 
10. 29 
12.22 
12.36 
12. 43 
11.67 
13.26 
12. 52 
10. 23 
14.22 
16.46 

1 


13. 51 
7. 86 
9.27 


70 > 


ke::::::::: 

737 


772 

773 


1 1 . 42 


701. 


9. s7 


702 


73'.' 


774 


13.26 
10 76 


704 

705 


740 

741 

742 

743 

744 

74.-, 

746 

747 


wo 


13.03 
16.02 


706 

70" 


77S 

7 7!) 


11.33 
13. 40 


70? 

703 

710 

711 

71? 


780 

781 

7'2 

78? 

7S4 


16.29 
15.94 
15.09 
16.02 
10. 90 


713 


740 


12. 88 


714 


750 

751 


7I::::::::: 


IS. 75 


715 


787 


10. 82 


7 Hi 


752 

7. r /: 

754 

755 


788 


12. 17 


717 


789 


12.57 


718 

710 


.■'.in 

791 

793 


10. 82 

17.22 


720 

72 1 


756 


12. 30 
13 24 


, 22 
723 


75V 

75' ' 


794 

795 

796 

7!I7 

798 

799 


10.11 
14 15 


724 


760 

761 

762 

7(1' 

704 

705 


14. 00 
12 56 


720 


16. f 2 


;-i • 


12.48 


~OJ 


Mill 


11.57 


72!' 







It will be noticed that there is a very large range of variation in 
the proteid nitrogen content of these wheats, running from 1.12 to 
4.05 per cent. By referring to Table 8, it will be seen that an equally 
large variation occurred between the plants when the whole plant 
was sampled. In the 351 analyses the nitrogen ranges from 1.20 to 
5.85 per cent. This is due in the main to the ability of the plant 
to gather nitrogen from the soil. In no one of the experiments to 
ascertain the effect of nitrogenous manures on the composition of 
wheat has there been an increase of more than a few tenths of 1 per 
cent, even when the nitrogenous fertilizer was added to an exhausted 
soil. It is, therefore, not likely that such large variation in nitrogen 
content could be due to irregularities in the supply of soil nitrogen. 
If this ability of the plant to store up a large amount of nitrogen in 
the kernel is hereditary, as results given later indicate, there is ample 
ODportunity to develop by selection a strain of wheat of high nitrogen 
content. 



84 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

A BASIS FOR SELECTION TO INCREASE THE QUANTITY OF 
PROTELDS IN THE ENDOSPERM OF THE KERNEL. 

White bread flour, which constitutes the major portion of the 
wheat Hour consumed in this country, is derived entirely from the 
endosperm of the wheat kernel. The portions of the kernel not 
entering into the Hour are the germ and the seed coat, attached to 
each of which discarded constituents are portions of the endosperm. 
The larger part of the aleurone layer either adheres to the hull and 
constitutes the "bran" of commerce, or appears in the product 
known as "shorts," and sometimes in low-grade flour. 

As it is the flour in which it is desired to increase the nitrogen, 
and as the flour consists entirely of the endosperm, it becomes desir- 
able to have some way to determine the nitrogen content of the 
endosperm alone and to select for reproduction plants possessing a 
large amount of nitrogen in this portion of the kernel. 

It is a question how this can best be done. A determination of 
gluten by the ordinary method of washing, to carry off the starch 
and fiber while the gluten is being worked in the hand, is not well 
adapted for use with the small quantities of wheat obtainable from 
a single plant. This also has the disadvantage that it gives no 
indication as to the quality of the gluten. 

Determinations of gliadin and glutenin promise to be of some help 
in affording a basis for selection from individual plants. It has 
been shown by^ Osborne and Voorhees" that the gluten of wheat is 
composed of gliadin and glutenin. It does not necessarily follow, 
however, that the sum of these two substances is a measure of the 
gluten content of the sample analyzed. Osborne and Campbell'' 
have stated that the embryo of the wheat kernel does not contain 
either gliadin or glutenin. This being the case, the sum of the 
gliadin and glutenin would represent these proteids in the endosperm, 
with, perhaps, a small amount in the hull. 

A recent investigation by Nasmith'' leads him to conclude that 
gliadin exists in all portions of the endosperm, including the aleu- 
rone layer, but that glutenin is contained only in the starch-bearing 
portion of the endosperm. A determination of glutenin may, there- 
fore, give an indication of the gluten content of the wheat. 

Table 1!) shows the percentage of proteid nitrogen, the sum of 
the gliadin and glutenin nitrogen, the amounts in grams of proteid 
and of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen in the average kernel, and the 
grams of proteid and of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen in all of the 
kernels on each plant. The plants are grouped into those having 

a American Cheni. Jour., 1893, pp. 392-471. 

■' Connecticut Experiment Station Report, 1S99, p. 30.5. 

■Trans. Canad. Inst., 7 (1S03), Univ. Toronto Studies, Physiol. Ser. (1903). No. 4. 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN ENDOSPERM. 



85 



from 1 to 2 per cent proteid nitrogen, those having 2 to 2.5 per cent 
proteid nitrogen, etc. Table 20 gives the averages lor each of (he 
groups in Table 19. 

Table 19. — Relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen /<» /noli id nitrogen. 
1 To 2 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



Record number. 


Percentage 

of- 


Num- 
ber i'f 
ker- 
nels. 




\\ 


r eigh1 (in grams) of 


Pro- 
teid 
nil ro- 
gen. 


Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Average 

kernel. 


Gliadin- 
Proteid i >li is- 
nitro- glutenin 
gen in nitro- 
kernels. gen in 
kernels. 


Proteid 
nil rogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 

1 rogen in 
average 
kernel. 


55307 

80305 

81705 


1.89 L.56 342 
LSI 1.77 72!) 
1. <»s 1.96 407, 


5. 6864 
15.7835 

'.I. 7022 


0.01663 
.02165 
.02106 


0.10747 0.08871 
.28569 .27937 
.19388 .19193 


0.0003142 

. 0003919 
.0004170 


0.0002594 
.0003832 
.0004128 


Average . . 


1.89 


1.70 512 10.4207 .QJ.978 .19568 . 1S007 .0003744 


. 0003518 



2 To 2.5 PKR CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21212 


2.16 
2.41 
2.36 
2.12 
2. 35 
2.39 
2.11 
2.38 
2.02 
2.48 
2. 42 
2.30 
2.42 
2.34 
2.21 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
2.30 
2.34 
2.41 


0.19 
1.70 
1.40 
1 . 65 
2.12 
1.02 
1.84 
1.80 
1.50 
1.97 
1.00 
1.66 
i.or, 
1.83 
2.05 
1.68 
l.M 
1.95 
2.O.", 
.64 
1.64 


84 
891 
777 
539 
318 
301 
1,031 
oos 
314 
167 
562 
302 
500 
462 
380 
544 
373 
583 
464 
786 
287 


1.7216 
16. 4061 
10. L854 
12.0399 
6. 1026 
7. 0596 . 
21.5399 
11.6655 
6.4302 
2. 5160 
12.2210 
9. 2120 
9.3093 
10.9073 
12.0728 

0. S20S 

7.0051 
11.7000 

9. 6451 
18.3614 

7. 3993 


0. 02049 
.01841 
.02400 
.02183 
.01919 
. 02345 
.02089 
.01919 
.02048 
. 01507 
.0217.-) 
. 03050 
. 01829 
.02361 
.03177 
. 01807 
.01878 
.02008 
. 02079 
.02336 
. 02578 


o 03718 
.39539 
. 45276 
. 24942 

.14341 
. 16872 
.45435 

.2770.', 
. 12989 
. 06240 

. 20.-,:.-, 

.211*7 
. 22529 
. 25522 
. 26680 
.23690 
. 15071 
.2440S 
.221S4 
.420,',:, 
.17833 


0.00327 
.27890 
.28010 
. 19866 

. 12643 
. 13554 

. 39035 

.20007 

.oooi;, 
.04957 
. 23953 
. 15292 
. L8153 

. 10000 

.24750 

. 107,14 

. 12680 
. 22828 
. 10772 
.1177.0 
. 12135 


0. 0004427 
. 0004437 
.0005827 
. 01X14627 
. 0004510 
0007,007, 
. (XX14407 
. 0004567 
,0004137 
. 0003736 
. 0005262 
.0007016 
. 0004426 
.0007,7,21 
.0007021 
. 0004355 
. 0004282 
. 0004197 
. 0004781 
.0007,400 
.0006213 


0.0000389 
.0003130 

.0003605 
. 0003602 
. 0004163 
. 0004502 
. 0003844 
. 0003454 
. 0003072 
. 0002969 
. 0004263 
. 0005063 
. 0003566 
.0004321 
.0006513 
. 0003036 
. 0003399 
. 0003916 
. 0004262 
.0001407, 
. 000422s 


27205 


27206 


27505 


33107 


33605 


39205 


48106 

48409 


55309 


55908 

55909 


56206 


56207 


57508 


65306 


65307 


65308 


74606 

81707 


81708 


Average. . 


2.30 


1.68 


489.6 


10.5.S74 


.02173 


.24272 


. 17872 


.0004001 


. 0003652 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



20706 


2.78 
2.77 
2.83 


2. 05 
1 . 85 
2.00 


163 
444 
867 


3. 3138 
9. 9070 
17.1115 


0. 02033 

. 022N2 
.01974 


0.00212 
.2744', 
. 48428 


0.06793 
. 18328 

. 34222 


0.0005652 
.0006181 
.0005586 


0.0004168 
.0004222 
. 0003948 


20707 


2071(1 


21207 


2.96 


.17 


118 


2. 3066 


. 01955 


.06804 


. 00392 


. 0005766 


. 0000332 


21305 


2.67 


1.97 


313 


6.2514 


. 02004 


. 16691 


. 12315 


. 0005353 


. 0003948 


21306 


2. 00 


.07 


226 


4. 1516 


.0is:i7 


. 12039 


. 04027 


,0005327 


.0001782 


21805 


2.69 


.23 


1,232 


20. 9290 


.01639 


.7,0200 


. 04704 


. 0004569 


. 0000391 


21807 


2. 73 


2.11 


377 


9. 4172 


. 02498 


.27,700 


. 19870 


. 0006664 


.0005271 


2180S 


2. 57 


1.00 


1,156 


19. 7446 


. 01708 


. 50744 


.38700 


.0004389 


. 0003348 


21800 


2.73 


2. IX 


418 


8. 0214 


.01919 


. 21898 


. 174S7 


. 0005238 


.0004183 


21905 


2. 64 


2.18 


791 


14.3111 


. 01809 


.37783 


.31198 


. 0004777 


.0003944 


22205 


2.81 


1.07 


283 


2. 6965 


.00953 


. 07577 


.05312 


.0002077 


Hs, 7 


22207 


2.77 


1 . 82 


169 


3. 2787 


• .01940 


.09082 


. 05967 


.0005374 


.0003531 


26905 


2.76 

2.71 


2.09 
1.82 


326 
228 


6. 4102 
4. 2376 


. 01966 

. 01859 


.17002 
. 11484 


. 1339S 


.0007,127 
.0005037 


.0004100 
.0003383 


26906 


26908 


2.96 
2.80 


2. 10 
1.88 


192 

ISO 


3. 9797 
2. 9999 


. 02073 
.01667 


.11780 
. 08400 


.08596 


.0006135 

. 0004667 


.OO0447S 
. 0003134 


26909 


27005 


2.63 
2.92 

2.58 


1.00 
1.07, 

1.7:; 


866 
100 
267 


16.4120 
3. 3266 
5.5666 


.01 S07, 
.02004 
.020-7, 


.43164 

.00712 

. 14362 


.31182 
.06487 
.09630 


.00040X4 

,0005850 

. 0005379 


.0003600 
.0003908 
. 0003607 


27207 


27305 


27307 


2.53 


.82 


167 


3.0850 


.01S47 


. 07805 


.02530 


. 0004074 


. 0001515 


27506 


2.70 


1.0X 


444 


10.0005 


.0227,2 


.27oo:; 


. losoo 


. 0006082 


. 0004459 


27508 


2. 64 
2.90 


LOO 


27,1 
243 


7,. 7, 24 


. 02287 
. 02206 


. 1400s 
.17,7,10 


. 12835 
.05844 


.0006037 

. 000G390 


. 00053C6 
. 0002405 


27509.. 



86 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY <>F WHEAT. 



Table 19.— Relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitrogen — Continued. 

2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



Record number, 



Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 
gen. 



28805... 

33105... 

37305 - 

37705... 

37707... 

38005. . 

38606... 

38608... 

38609... 

39405... 

39.-.I If i. 

40505... 

43405... 

44505. - 

44606... 

46107... 

48305. . . 

18806 

55008 .. 

55206.. 

55308. . 

55506... 

55507... 

55605... 

55606... 

55905. . . 

55906... 

55907... 

56105.. 

56106... 

56107.. 

56205.. 

5620S. . 

56209.. 

57007.. 

57400.. 

57407.. 

.-,740s.. 

57506.. 

57507.. 

57805.. 

58805.. 

63106.. 

66005. . 

81505. . 

81706.. 



Average 



2.91 

2.91 
2.96 
'.' 64 
2.93 
2. 84 
2. 63 
2. 82 
2.74 
2. 88 
2. 93 
2. 82 

2. '.14 
'.'.'."I 
2. 5 1 
2. NT 
2. 70 
2.60 
2. 56 
2. 54 
2.80 
2.63 
2.64 
2. 58 
2. 67 
2.81 
2. 59 
2.73 
2. 57 
2.96 
2.51 
2.61 
2.59 
2.65 
2. 75 
2. 62 
2.61 
2. 80 
2.85 
2. 87 
2.74 
2. 79 
2.63 
2. 94 
2.71 



Glia- 
din- 
plus- 
glu- 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 

1 . 55 
3.50 
2. 29 
1.26 

2. Hi 
1.23 
1.39 
1.73 
1.34 
1.44 
2.06 
2 19 
1.18 

.70 
1.29 
2. OS 
1.77 

.75 
1.58 
1.87 

.65 
2.20 
2.07 
1.96 
1.49 
1.75 
1.47 
1.61 
2.12 
2.09 
2.23 
1.85 
1.95 
2.21 
2.09 
2.13 
1.86 
1.64 
2. 34 
1.55 
2.68 
2.11 
2.20 
2.18 
2. 65 
2. 03 



Weight (in grams) of- 



Num- 
ber of 
ker- | 
nels. 



s7 
132 
309 

461 
193 
139 

401 
I5S 
293 
447 

67 
170 
124 
340 
124 
478 
473 
547 
944 
578 
397 
866 
504 
500 
503 
331 
499 
749 
336 
644 
872 
333 
563 
950 

88 
135 
762 
596 

ISO 

359 

270 

1,158 

165 

370 
146 
722 



Ker- 
nels. 



2. I>51 
2.5601 
6. 1394 
8.0905 

:;. I 

2 5134 
s. 1605 
3.0228 

6. 7665 
9.3541 
1.9218 
4. 1546 
2 8000 
5.9990 
2. 5235 
8.3935 

12.0278 

9.8346 
17.422(1 
11.3592 

9.5078 
L7.8506 

9.8228 
10.9180 
11.0930 

5. 7948 

7. (I! II IS 
19. 3966 

5. 7431 

12. 0161 
14. 4556 

6. 5232 

13. 5720 
15. 8086 

1.5364 

2. 4923 
14.9992 
12. 2004 

2.7616 

6. 9S61 

1. 8988 

23. 1471 

3. 3006 
7.6690 
2.8327 

15. 3928 



Average 
kernel. 



0.02512 
.01939 
.01987 

.01H72 
.01710 



.02110 
.01913 
.02309 
.02093 
. 02869 
. 02444 
.02258 
.01764 
.02035 
. 01756 
.02543 
.01798 
.01846 

• 

02395 

.020112 

.01949 
; 02184 

. 02205 
.01751 
.01603 

.025! 10 
. 01709 
.01806 
.01658 
. 01959 
.02:15(1 
. 01664 
.01746 
. 01846 
.01968 
. 02047 
.01534 
. 01946 
.01814 
. 01999 
.02001 
.02073 
.01940 
.02132 



Proteid 
nitro- 
gen in 

kernels. 



Gliadin- Prnt „ ir : i Gliadiri- 

P lus " nitr wen P lu ?-g lu " 

glutenin f™°™- tenin ni " 

nitro- "„eler- trogm in 

gen in a& , average 

kernels. I ernel. 



0.06 59 

.07150 

.18173 

.2 1' I' is 

.09670 

. 07138 
.22251 
. 0S522 
. 18540 
.21399 
. 05631 
.11716 
. 08176 
. 17637 
.07318 
.21319 
. 34524 
. 26553 
.152'. K I 
.2 1(17') 
.24150 
. 4 1995 
. 25834 
.28823 
. 28580 
. 15170 
. 22471 
.50238 
. 15679 
. 30881 
. 42790 
. 16373 
. 34616 
. 40945 
.04164 
.litis;, | 
. 39297 
.31842 
.07733 
. 19905 
. 14060 
. 63422 
. 09208 
.02017 
.08328 
.41715 



2.74 1.79 419.3 8.2271 



.01991 .22222 



.03387 

.03960 

. 140(10 

.10194 

. 06931 
.03091 

. 117(10 
.11522'.! 
.09067 
.13470 
.03959 
. 09099 
.03304 
.04199 



.21241 
.06180 
.39272 
.20333 

.21400 
. 16529 
.10141 
. 11755 
. 31229 
. 12175 
.25174 
. 32236 
. 12068 
. 26465 
. 34937 
.03211 
.05309 
. 27898 
. 20008 
.06462 
. 10828 
. 13126 
.48839 
.072(11 
. K1714 
. 07507 
. 31248 



i ii ii 17: 101 1 


0. 1894 


0005644 


.0006787 


0005881 


.0004550 


0005327 


.0002485 


000501(1 


.0003591 


0005135 


.0002224 


0005549 


.0002! 133 


01105;! 14 


.0003309 


.0(10(1475 


.0003094 


.000(1027 


,0003014 


.000X404 


.0005910 


.0006892 


.0005352 


. 0006594 


.0002664 


. ( ii i( 15 1 s7 


.0001235 


.0005! 102 


.00021125 


.0004460 


.0003652 


.0007299 


.0004501 


.0004877 


.oooi:i4s 


.0004799 


.0002917 


.0005031 


. 0003675 


.000(1225 


1 557 


.0110577:; 


. 0004536 


. 0005126 


.00040:14 


. 0005765 


.OIK 14281 


. 0005690 


.0002609 


.01 1041 174 


.0003064 


.0004503 


. 0002356 


.0006/07 


.0004170 


14(1117 


. 0003622 


.00047! 15 


. 0003900 


. 0004907 


. 0003697 


.0004917 


. 0003624 


.0006149 


. C004594 


.0004310 


.0003677 


. 0004731 


. 0003649 


. 0005077 


. 0003932 


. (111115157 


. 0003660 


5343 


. 0003557 


. 0004296 


. 0003590 


. 0005545 


.0003016 


.0005207 


. 0004861 


. 0005464 


. 0004218 


.0111155s! 


. 0004402 


. 0005451 


. 0004519 


. 0005704 


.0005141 


. 0005778 


. 0004328 



.14658 .0005468 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



2070!! 


3. 05 
3.32 
3.16 

3.24 
3. 04 
3. 18 
3. 35 

3.22 
3.18 
3.17 
3. 17 
3. 09 
3.07 
3.02 
3.41 
3.22 
3. 2!) 
3.20 


2.31 

2. 26 
.22 
2. 15 
.46 
2. 10 
2.15 
2.11 
2.14 
1.55 
1.69 
2. 28 
2.42 
1.86 
2.41 
2.45 
2.13 
2.17 


258 
697 
123 
287 
143 
408 
158 
146 
118 
298 
561 
222 
219 
685 
150 
136 
157 
556 


5. 3229 
14.6942 

2. 3642 
5. 1594 
2.569] 

10. 4800 
2. 9248 
2.5712 
1. 9090 
6. 0173 

11.5675 
3.8811 

. 4. 3698 

14. 4630 
3. 1346 
2. 8903 
2.6571 
9. 45S5 


0. 02063 
.02157 
.01922 
.01798 
.0179(1 
.027,1;:; 
.01851 
.01720 
.01619 
.02019 

.020(12 
.01~48 

.01996 

.02111 

.020: Ml 

.02125 
.01692 
.01701 


0. 16235 
. 48784 
.07471 
. 1(1712 
.07810 
. 33402 
. 03798 
. 08086 
. 06071 
. 19075 
. 36671 
. 11992 
. 13415 
. 43679 
. 10689 
. 09307 
.08742 
. 30267 


0. 12296 
. 33208 
. 00520 
.11093 
.011.82 
. 22008 
. 062S8 
. 05425 
. 04084 
. 09327 
. 19548 
. 08849 
. 10575 
. 26901 
.07554 

,07081 

. 05660 

.20525 


0. 0006292 
.0006999 

. 0006074 
. 0005824 
.0005461 
.000X168 
. 0006201 
. 0005538 
.0005144 
. 0006401 
. 0006537 
.0005402 
.0006126 
. 0006376 
. 0007126 
. 0006843 
. 0005568 
. 0005444 


0. 0004766 
. 0004875 
. 0000423 
. 0003866 
. 0000826 
. 0005382 
. 0003980 
. 0003629 
. 0003465 
.0003129 
. 0003485 
. 0003985 
. 0004830 
.0003926 
. 0005037 
. 0005206 
.0003604 
.0(103691 


20805 


2121 15 


21208 


21307 


21906 


21907 


22206... 


2221 is 


22210 


22211 


26808 


28206... 


2S806. . . 


33305 


33607 


48306 


48506 





SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN ENDOSPERM. 87 

Table 19. — Relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid nitrogen Continued. 
3 T<> 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN -Continued. 



Pi r. entage 
of— 



Record number. Pro- 
teid 
nitro- 



48705 3.13 



48706. 
55005. 
55006. 
55508 
57905. 
58207. 
58705. 



Average . . 



3.00 
3.05 
3. 16 
3. 1 1 
3. is 
3.09 
3.01 



L.56 


.71 


1.99 


1.75 


1.96 


2. 92 


2. 40 


2.47 



Glia- Num- 
din- berof 
plus- ker- 
glu- ni'K. 
tenin 
nitro- 
gen. 



264 
379 
393 

4.". I 
216 
221 
307 
L' !5 



Weighl i in grams) of 



i;lir " lin " PmtoiH Gliadin- 

Proteid plus- ,- " ' plus-glu- 

Ker- Average nitro- glu tenin i""°°, teninni- 

nels. kernel, gen in nitro- .'',,.,." trogenin 

kernels, pen in ' a-a-or, 





4.3615 


il. L983 


7.9684 


7. 1 852 


3.7407 


2.4731 


4.2207 


2.5436 



0.01652 

.Dili,-, 
.0202s. 
.01593 
.01732 
.0H18 
.01375 
.01082 



0. 13652 
. 18596 
.24303 

.'J27o:. 
.11636 
.07 s.v.i 
. 13042 
. 07656 



kernels. 



nel. 



0.06S04 

.04101 

. 15857 
. L2574 
.07332 

.07221 
. 107,10 

. 06283 



0.00(17,171 

.0004906 
.0006185 

.0007,0.; i 
.0005386 
.0003556 
.0004248 

. 0003258 



3.16 | 1.95 299.5 5.5317 



.01817 



.17002 .10389 



.0005741 



average 

kernel. 



0.00027,77 
.0001 Hi) 

.oi 16 

.0002788 
0003395 

.i 3264 

.0003424 
.000207:: 



.0003516 



.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17506 

18905 

21811 

21908 

201(17 

38505 

42205 

45005 

48505 

66006 

Average . 



3. 52 


2.23 


3.81 


L, 54 


3. 77, 


2.16 


3. 82 


1.88 


3.92 


1.35 


3.61 


1.77 


3.63 


2. 73 


3. 58 


1.36 


3.66 


1.76 


3.54 


1.38 


3.68 


1.82 



93 


2.2881 


103 


1.4S04 


567 


11.9114 


173 


3. 7,7,74 


144 


2.0390 


563 


12. 1083 


94 


1.8494 


2 15 


3. 214 J 


137 


1.9154 


366 


6. 0090 



0. 02460 
.01 li:: 
.02101 
.02056 

.01410 
.022.72 
. 01967 
.01376 

.01398 

.01042 



247.5 4.6399 l .01811 



0.08044 
.05663 

. 44066 
. L3589 
.07993 
. 13713 
. 06713 
. 117,77, 
. 07010 
. 21272 



0. 05102 
.(13.31-, 
. 25728 

.001 iSS 
.0277,; 
.21432 
.07,04'.) 

.04398 
. 03371 
.08292 



0. 0008660 
.0005498 
.0007877 
.0007855 

.0005551 
.0007704 
.0007142 
. 0004927 

.0007,117 

. 0005812 



.17024 .08613 



.0006620 



0. 0005486 
.0003218 
. 0004538 
.0003955 
.0001912 
.000 1986 
.G005370 
.0001871 
.0002400 
. 0002266 

. 0003506 



4 TO 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN 



21812 4.26 

21813 4.04 

21909 i 4.43 

34407) 4.33 

55007 1 4.21 

76206 4. 47, 



Average 



4.29 



2.02 


983 


14.8137 


0.01507 


2. 14 


210 


4.0258 


.01S77 


1.98 


7,27, 


12. L819 


.02317 


2.44 


207 


4. 12M 


.01104 


2.21 


118 


2. 17,71 


.01N2.S 


2.03 


447 


7,. 4111 


.01217 


2.14 


416 


7. 1230 


.01700 



0.63107 
. 16377 
. 53889 
. 17875 
. 09082 
. 24213 



0.29934 0.0006420 
. 08615 . 0007582 



.20N40 
. 10073 
. 04767 
.11046 



.0010265 
. 0008635 
.0007000 
. 0005417 



: '077,7 



.15714 .0007669 



0. 0003044 
.0004017 
. 0005677 
. 0004865 
. 0004040 
.0002171 



. 0004019 



MORE THAN 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21205. 
21210. 
40205. 
48406. 
69805. 
72607. 
02300. 



Average 



5. 23 


0.22 


149 


2. 8564 


0.01917 


0. 14939 


5.03 


1.34 


237 


3.9143 


.01577 


. 196S9 


4.00 


3.07 


104 


3. 6302 


.01871 


.17026 


4.87 


2.25 


249 


3.2964 


.01324 


. 16053 


5.82 


1.94 


110 


2.4420 


. 02220 


. 14213 


5. 59 


2.51 


188 


3. 4442 


.01832 


. 19253 


4.93 


4.06 


347 


6.0091 


.01732 


.29625 


5.16 


2.198 


210. 6 


3. 6561 


. 01782 


. 18685 



0.00628 0.0010020 

.1)5245 .0007934 

.11145 I .0008776 

.08168 , .0006447 

.04738 .0012021 

.08645 .0010241 

.21307 .OO()S.-,30 



0. 0000422 
.0002113 

.0007,744 
.0002070 
.0004307 
. 0004598 
. 0007032 



osoi i7, .0(1(10209 , .0003885 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 20. — Summary of analyses, showing relation of gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen to proteid 

n i/rogen. 





Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Percentage 
of 


Num- 
ber of 

ker- 
nels. 


"Weight iiu grams) of— 


Range of per- 
centage of 
proteid nitro- 
gen. 


Glia- 

Pro- ,lin " 

g ■ nitro- 
gen. 


Proteid 
Kernels Average nitrogen 
Kernels. keTne] jn kl .,._ 

llels 


Gliadin- 
plus-glu- 

tenin 
nitrogen 

in 
kernels. 


Proteid Gliadin- 

s a e f S 

Kernel kernel. 


1 to 2 


3 

21 

70 
26 
111 
6 

7 


1.89 1-76 


512.0 
489.6 

419. 3 
299.5 
247.5 
416.0 
210.6 


10'. 4207 0.01978 0.19568 
10.5874 .112173 .21272 
8.2271 .01991 .22222 
5.5817 .01817 .17602 
4.6399 .01811 : . 171)21 
7.1230 .01790 .30757 
3.6561 .01782 . L8685 


0. 18667 
.17872 

. 13948 
. 10889 
. 08613 
. 15714 
. 08995 


0.0003744 0.0003518 


2 to 2. 5 

2.5 to 3 


2. Mil 
2.74 
3.16 
3.68 
4.29 
5.16 


1.68 
1.73 
1.95 

1.82 
2.22 
2.20 


.0004991 .0003652 

.01 K i."4i is .nun:; 112 


3 to 3.5 


.0005741 | .0003516 


3.5 to 4 

1 to 4. 5 


.0006620 .0003506 
.0007669 .0004019 


i 5 and over.. .. 


.0009269 j .0003886 



The figures in Table 20 show that while gliadin-plus-glutenin nitro- 
gen increases with proteid nitrogen it does not do so in the same ratio, 
the increase in proteid nitrogen being due in large measure to an 
increase in other proteids. 

The same analyses are tabulated in Table 21 according to the 
increase in gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen, and the averages for each 
group are stated in Table 22. In the latter table the increase in 
proteid nitrogen does not keep pace with the increase in gliadin-plus- 
glutenin nitrogen, there being 1.74 per cent other proteid nitrogen in 
the first group and 1.25 per cent in the last. 

It thus becomes evident that a determination of proteid nitrogen in 
the kernel is not an accurate guide to the content of gliadin plus 
glutenin, and that a direct determination of these substances is 
necessary. 

It is, furthermore, apparent that a determination of gliadin-plus- 
glutenin nitrogen will permit of the selection of kernels having a 
large percentage of these substances. 

Table 21. — Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus-glutenin nitrogen. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1 TO 1.5 PER CENT. 



Percentage of- 



Weight (in grams) of- 



Record num- 
ber. 



2121(1 

26107 

2720 i 

27509 . . 

37705 

38005 

38606 

38609 

39405 

13405 

44606 

15005 

55606 

55906 

66006 

Average 



Gliadin- 




plus- 


Proteid 


glute- 


nitro- 


imi ni- 


gen. 


trogen. 




1.34 


5.03 


L.35 


3.92 


1 . 46 


2. 36 


1.09 


2.90 


1.26 


2. (14 


1.23 


2.84 


1.39 


2. 63 


1.34 


2. 7 1 


1.44 


2.88 


I. 18 


2.92 


1.29 


2.90 


1.36 


3.58 


1.49 


2.58 


1.47 


2. SI 


1.38 


3.54 


1.34 


3.08 



Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 



Kernels. 



Average 
kernel. 



237 
144 
777 
243 
461 
139 
401 
293 
447 
124 
124 
235 
505 
499 
366 



3.9143 
2. 0390 

19. L854 
5.31115 
8.0905 
2.5134 
8. 1605 
6. 7665 
9.3541 
2. soon 
2. 5235 
3. 2340 

11.0930 
7.9968 
6.0090 



0.01575 
.01416 
. 02469 
.02206 

.01072 
.01808 
.02110 
.112:100 
.02093 
. 02258 
.02035 
.01370 
.02205 
.01603 
.01042 



Gliadin 

plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 



333 



6.6228 



.01030 



0.05245 

.02753 

.28010 
. 05844 

. 10104 

.03001 

.11760 

.00007 

. 13470 
.03304 

.03255 

.04398 

. 10520 
. 1 1 755 
.08292 



.09198 



Proteid Gliadin- 
n^trogen P* 8 ^ 
in ker- Ilm nltr °- 
nefs gen in aver- 
age kernel. 



0. 19689 
. 07993 
. 15276 
. 15549 
. 23998 
.07138 
.22251 
. 18540 
.21300 
.08176 

.073 IS 
. 11575 
.2S.-.S0 
.22171 
.21272 



. 18748 



Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 



0.0002113 
.0001912 
. 0003605 
.000240.-! 
.0002485 
. 0002224 
. 0002933 
.0003094 
.0003014 
.0002664 
.0002625 
.0001871 
.0002609 
.0002356 
.0002266 



0.0007031 

.0005551 
.0005827 
.0006399 
.0005327 

. I Kill.". 135 

.0005549 

. i nun .170 
.0006027 
.0006594 

.0005002 
.01 II 1 1027 
.0005690 
.0004503 
. 0005812 



.0002545 .0005843 



SELECTION TO INCREASE PROTEIDS IN ENDOSPERM. 



89 



Table 21. — Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-^plus-glutenin nitrogen — Continued. 

GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.5 To 2 PEE CENT. 





Percentage of— 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 




Weight (in 


grams) ol 






Record mim- 
ter. 


Gliadin- 
plus- 
glute- 

niu ni- 
trogen. 


Proteid 
nitro- 
gen. 


Kernels. 


A vera ire 
kernel. 


Gliadin- 

plus-gln- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Proteid 
mi rogeD 
in ker- 
nels. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 

nin nitro- 
gen in aver- 
age kernel. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


18905 


1.54 
1.85 
1.97 

1.96 
1.88 
1.98 
1.97 
1.82 
1.55 
1.69 
1.82 
1.88 
1.90 
1.70 
1.95 
1.73 
1 . 65 
1.98 
1.55 

1.86 

1.92 
1.77 
1.73 
1.84 
1.80 
1.77 
1.50 
1.76 
1.56 
1.99 
1.75 
1.58 
1.87 
1.97 
1.56 
1.96 
1.96 
1.75 
1.61 
1.96 
1.66 
1.85 
1.95 
1.83 
1.95 
1.86 
1.64 
1.55 
1.68 
1.81 
1.95 
1.94 
1 . 76 
1.96 
1.64 


3.81 
2.77 
2.67 
2.57 
3.82 

1. 13 
2.81 
2.77 
3.17 
3.17 
2.71 
2.80 
2.63 
2.41 
2.92 
2.58 
2.12 
2.70 
2.91 
3.02 
2.39 
3.61 
2.82 
2.11 
2.38 
2.87 
2.02 
3.66 
3.13 
3.05 
3. 16 
2.60 
2. 57 
2.48 
1.89 
3.11 
2.64 
2.67 
2.59 
2.42 
2.30 
2.51 
2.42 
2.34 

2. 61 
2.62 
2.61 
2.85 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
5.82 
1.81 
1.98 
2.11 


103 
444 
312 
1,156 
173 
525 
283 
169 
298 
561 
228 

ISO 

866 
891 
166 
267 
539 
144 
S7 
685 
301 
563 
158 
1,031 
608 
473 
314 
137 
264 

:m 

451 
944 
578 
167 
342 
216 
500 
331 
749 
562 
302 
333 
509 
462 
563 
762 
596 
359 
544 
373 
583 
110 
729 
465 
287 


1. 1864 
9.9070 
6.2514 

19.7446 
3. 5574 
12. 1819 
2. 6965 
3.2787 
6.0173 
11.5675 
4.2376 
2.9999 
16.4120 
16.4061 
3.3266 
5. 5666 
12. 0399 
10. 0005 
2. 1851 
14.4630 
7. 0596 
12. 1088 
3.0228 
21.5399 
11.6655 
12.0278 
6. 4302 
1.9154 
4.3615 
7.9684 
7. 1852 
17.4226 
11.3592 
2.5160 
5.6864 
3. 7407 
10.9180 
5.7948 
19.3966 
12.2210 
9.2120 
6. 5232 
9.3093 
10.9073 
13.5720 
14.9992 
12.2004 

6. '.(Mil 

9. S298 
7.0051 

11.7066 
2. 4420 

15. 7835 
9. 7922 
7. 3993 


0.01443 
.02282 

.02004 
.01708 
. 02056 
.02317 
.00953 
.01940 
.02019 
.02062 
.01859 
.01667 
.01895 
.01841 
.02004 
.02085 
.02183 
.02252 
.02572 
.02111 
. 02345 
.02252 
.01913 
.02089 
.01919 
.02543 
.02048 
. 01398 
.01652 
.02028 
.01593 
.01846 
.01965 
.01507 
. 01663 
.01732 
.02184 
.01751 
.02590 
.02175 
. 03050 
.01959 
. 01829 
.03361 
. 02356 
.01968 
.02047 
.01946 
.01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.02220 
.02165 
.02106 
.02578 


0.03315 

. 18328 
. 12315 
.38700 
. 066S8 
.29846 
.05312 
.05967 
.09327 
. 19548 
.07712 
. 05640 
.31182 
. 27890 

.oiiisr 

. 09630 
. 19866 
. 19800 
.03887 

.26901 
. 13554 
.21432 
.05229 
.39635 
. 20997 
. 21289 
.09645 
.03371 
.06804 
. 15857 
. 12574 
. 27528 
.21241 
. 04957 
. 08871 
.07332 
.21400 
.10141 
.31229 
.23953 
. 15292 
. 12068 
. 18153 
. 19960 
. 26465 
. 27898 
.20008 
. 10828 
. 16514 
. 12680 
.22828 
.04738 
. 27937 
. 19193 
.12135 


0.05663 

. 27 1 13 
. 16691 
.50711 
. L3589 
.53889 
.07577 
.09082 
. II 1075 
.36671 
.11484 
.08400 
. 13164 
.39539 
.09712 
. 14362 
. 24942 
. 27003 
. 06359 
. 43679 
.16872 
.43713 
,08522 
.45435 
.27765 
. 34524 
. 12989 
.07010 
. 13052 
.24303 
. 22705 
. 45299 
.29079 
.06240 
. 10747 
. 11636 
. 28823 
. 15470 
. 50238 
.29575 
.21187 
. 16373 
.22529 
. 25522 
. 34616 
.39297 
.31842 
. 19905 
. 23690 
. 15971 
. 24468 
. 14213 
.28569 
. 19388 
. 17833 


0.0003218 
. 0004222 
.0003948 

. 0003348 
.0003955 
.0005677 
.0001877 
.0003531 
.0003129 
.i mo; lis;, 
.0003383 
.0003134 
.0003600 
.0003130 
.0003908 

.00031,117 
. 0003602 
.0004459 
.0003894 
.0003926 
.0001502 
.0003986 
.0003309 
.0003844 
. 0003454 
. 0004501 
. 0003072 
.0002460 
. 0002577 
. 0004036 
.0002788 
.0002917 
.0003675 
.0002909 
.0002599 
.0003395 
.0004281 
.0003064 
.0004170 
. 0004263 
.0005063 
.0003624 
. 0003566 
. 0004321 
.0004594 
.0003660 
.0003357 
.0003016 
.0003036 
.0003399 
.0003916 
.0004307 
. 0003832 
.0004128 
.0004228 


0. 0005498 


20707 


.0006181 


21305 


.0005350 


21808 


. 0004389 


21908. . . 


. 0007855 


21909... 


.0010265 


22205 


.0002677 


22207. . 


.0005376 


22210 

22211 


.0006401 
,0006537 


26906 


. 0005037 


26909 

27005 


. 0004667 
. 0004984 


27205 


,i 1437 


27207 


. 0005850 


27305 


.lion.",; IT'.) 


27505 


.00041127 


27506 


. 0006082 


28805 


. 0007309 


28806... 


. 0006376 


33605 

38505 


.0005605 
.0007764 


38608 

39205 


.0005394 
. 0004407 


48106 


. 0004567 


48305 


. 0007299 


48409 


.0004137 


48505 

48705 

55005 


.0005117 
.0005171 
.0006185 


55006 

55008 


. 0005034 
. 0004799 


55206 

55305 

55307 


. 0005031 
. 0003736 
. 0003142 


55508 

55605 

55905 


. 0005386 
. 0005765 
. 0004674 


55907 

55909 

56205 

56206 


.000, .707 
.0005262 
.0007016 
.0004917 
. 0004426 


56207 


.0005524 


56208 


.0006149 


57407 


.0005157 




. 0005343 


57507 

65306 

65307 

65308 

69805 

80305..., 

81705 


. 0005545 
. 0004355 
. 0004282 
.0004197 
.0002921 
.0003919 
.0004170 


81708 


.0006213 






Average. . . 


.1.80 


2.76 


442.5 


9.0243 


.02016 


. 16392 


. 23801 


. 0003653 


.0005538 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2 TO 2 5 PER CENT. 



17.506". 

20706. 
20709. 
20710. 
20805. 
21208. 
21S07. 
21809. 
21811. 
21S12. 
21813. 
21905. 



2.23 


3. 52 


93 


2.05 


2.78 


163 


2.31 


3.05 


258 


2.00 


2. 83 


867 


2.26 


3.32 


697 


2.15 


3.24 


287 


2.11 


2. 73 


377 


2.18 


2.73 


41S 


2.16 


3.75 


567 


2.02 


4.26 


983 


2.14 


4.04 


216 


2.18 


2.64 


791 



2. 2881 
3.3138 
5. 3229 
17.1115 
14.6942 

5. 15'. 1 4 
9.4172 
8. 0214 
11.9114 
14. 8139 
4. 025S 
14.3111 



0. 02460 
.02033 
. 02063 
.01974 
.02157 
.01798 
. 02498 
.01919 
.02101 
. 01507 
.II1S77 
. 01809 



0.05102 

. 06793 
. 12296 
. 34222 

! 33208 
.11093 
. 19870 
. 17487 
. 25728 
. 29934 
.08615 
.31198 



0. 08044 

.01)212 
. 16235 
. 48428 
. 4S7S4 
. 16712 
. 25709 
. 21898 
. 44666 
.63107 
. 16377 
.37781 



0. 0005486 
.0004168 
. 0004766 
. 0003948 
. 0004875 
.0003866 
.0005271 
.0004183 
.0004538 
. 0003044 
.0004017 
. 0003944 



0. 000S6»0 
.0005652 
.00062&2 
.0005586 

. 0006999 
. 0005824 
.0006064 
. 0005238 
.0007877 
. 0006420 
.0007582 
. 0004777 



90 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 21. — -Relation of proteid nitrogen to gliadin-jAus-glutenin nitrogen — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTEN1N NITROGEN, 2 TO 2.5 PER CENT— Continued. 





Percentage of 


Num- 
ber of 
ker- 
nels. 






Weight (in grams) of— 




Record num- 
ber. 


Gliadin- 
plus- 
glute- 
nin ni- 
trogen. 


Proteid 
nitro- 
gen. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


1 Jliadin- 
plus-glu- 
tenin ni- 
trogen in 
kernels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Gliadin- 
plus-glute- 

nin nitro- 
gen in aver- 
age kernel. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel. 


21906.. 

21907 


2.10 
2. 15 
2. 1 1 
2.14 
2. 28 
2.09 
2. 16 
2.32 
2. 42 
2.12 
2.41 
2 45 
2. 44 
2. 29 
2. ID 

2 in; 

2. L9 

2. OS 
2 13 
2. 2.", 
2. 17 
2.21 
2. 21) 
2.07 

■> |0 

£ 09 

2. 2 ; 

2 21 
2.09 
2.13 
2.34 

2. 05 
2.49 
2.47 
2. 11 
2.20 
2 is 
2.05 
2.0! 
2.03 


3. is 
3. 35 
3. 22 

3! 10 
3.09 

2. 7i; 
2.96 
2.64 
:;. 07 
2.35 
?,. 41 

3. 22 

4. 33 
2.96 
2. 93 
2.93 
2 82 
2.54 
3.29 
4.S7 
3.20 
4.21 
2.80 
2.63 
2. 7:; 
2.57 
2.96 
2.59 
2.65 
2.75 
2.80 
2.21 
3.09 
3.01 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2. 30 
4.45 
2.71 


408 

158 
146 
lis 
222 
326 
192 
251 
210 
3 l,s 
150 
136 
207 
309 
193 
67 
170 
478 
157 
249 
556 
118 
S66 
504 
336 
644 
872 
950 
168 
135 
ISO 
380 
307 
235 
1,158 
165 
370 
464 
447 
722 


10.4800 
2.9248 

2.5712 
1.9090 
3.8811 
6. 4102 
3. 9797 

5. 5324 
4. 3698 

6. 1026 

3. 1346 

2. S0( 12 

4. 12X1 

6. 1394 
3.3004 
1.9218 
4.1546 
8.3935 
2. 6571 

3. 2964 
9. 4585 
2. 1571 

17. 8506 
0. 8228 

5. 7431 
12.0161 
14. 4556 
15. 8086 

1.5364 
2. 4923 
2. 7616 
12.072S 

4. 2207 

2. 5436 
23. 1471 

3. 3006 

7. 6690 
9. 6451 
5.4411 

15.3928 


0. 02563 
. 01851 
.01720 
.01619 
.01748 
. 01966 
.0207:; 
.02287 
. 01996 
.01919 
. 02090 
.02125 
. 01994 
. 01987 
.01710 
.02869 
02444 
.01756 
.01692 
.01324 
.01701 
. 01828 
. 02062 
. 01949 
.01709 
. 01S66 
. 01658 
. 01664 
. 01746 
. 01846 
. 01534 
. 03177 
. 01375 
. 01082 
. 01999 
.02001 
. 02073 
. 02079 
.01217 
. 02132 


0.2200s 
. 0628S 
. 05425 
.04084 
. 08849 
. 13398 
. 08596 
. 12835 
. 10575 
. 12643 
.07554 
. 07081 
. 10073 
. 14000 
.06931 
.03959 
. 09099 
. 17458 
. 05660 
. 08168 
. 20525 
. 04767 
.39272 
. 20333 
. 03503 
.05768 
. 105.".;: 

. 34037 
.03211 
. 05309 
. 06462 
.24750 
. 10510 
. 06283 
. 48839 
. 07261 
.16714 
. 19772 
. 11046 
. 31248 


0. 33403 
.09798 
.08086 

. 06071 
.11002 
. 17092 
. 1 17S0 
. 14608 
.13415 
. 14341 
. 10689 
. 09307 
. 17875 
. 18173 
. 09670 
.05631 
.11716 
.21310 
.08742 
. 16053 
.30267 
. 09082 
. 49995 
. 25834 
. 15679 
.30881 
. 42702 
. 40945 
. 04164 
. 06*54 
. 07733 
. 26680 
. 13042 
. 07656 
. 63422 
. 09208 
. 20170 
.22184 
.24213 
.41715 


0.0005382 
. 0003980 

. 0003629 
.000! 105 
.111 in !985 
.000-1100 
. 0004478 
.0005306 
. 0004830 
.0004163 
. 0005037 
. 0005206 
. 0004865 
.0004550 
.0003591 
.0005010 
. 0005352 
.0003652 
. 0003604 

r_'07! 1 

.0003691 
. 0004040 
. 0004536 
. 0004034 
.0001042 
. 0000896 
.0001210 
. 0003677 
. 0003649 
. 0003932 
. 0003590 
. 0006513 
. 0003424 
. 0002673 
. 0004218 
. 0004402 
.0004510 
. 0004262 
. 0002471 
. 0004328 


0.0008168 

. 0006201 


2221 Iti 

22208 


.0005538 
.0005144 


26808 


.0005402 


26905 


.0005427 


26908 


.0006135 


27508 


.0006037 


28206 

33107 

33305 


. 0006126 
. 0004510 
. 0007126 


33607 


. 0006843 


34405 


.001 ISO::.", 


37305 

37707 

30506 

40505 


.0005881 
.0005010 
.0008404 

.( ;so2 


46107 

48306 

48406 

18506 

55007 


. 0004460 
.0005568 

.0005447 
. 0005444 
. 0007696 


55506 

55507 

56105 

56106 

56107 

56209 


. 0005773 
.0005126 
. 0004667 
. 0004795 
.0004907 
. 0004310 


57007 


. 0004731 


57406 

57506 

5750S 

5S207 

58705 

58805 


,0005077 

. 0001296 
. 0007021 
. 0004248 
. 0003258 
. 0005464 


63106 

66005 

74606 

76206 

81706 


. 0005581 
. 0005451 
. 0004781 
. 0005417 
. 0005778 


Average . . . 


2.18 


3.08 


380.1 


7. 2520 


. 01935 


. 14641 


. 21535 


. 0004063 


. 0005872 



(JUADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2.5 TO 3 PER CENT. 



42205 


2. 73 
2 os 
2 02 
2. 51 
2 65 


3.63 
2. s7 
3.18 
5.59 
2.94 


94 
270 
221 
188 
146 


1. 8494 
4.8988 

2. 4731 

3. 4442 
2.8327 


0. 01967 
.01814 

.01118 
. 018?2 
. 01940 


0. 050049 
. 13126 
. 07221 
.03645 

.7507 


0. 06713 
. 14060 

. 07859 
. 19253 
. 0332S 


0. 0005370 
.0004861 

.000-264 
.0004598 

.0005141 


0.0007142 


57805 


.0005207 


57905 


.000 '556 


72607 

81505 


.00:0241 
.0005704 


Average . . . 


2.698 


3.64 


183.8 


3. 0696 


. 01734 


. 08310 


.11243 


.0C01647 


. 0006370 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTEN1N NITROGEN, 3 PER CENT AND OVER. 



10205 


3. 07 
4.06 


4.69 
4.93 


194 
347 


3. 6302 
6.0091 


0.01871 
.01732 


0.11145 
.24307 


0.17026 
. 29625 


0. 0005744 
. 0007032 


0. 000S776 


02: -or, 


. 000N539 


Average . . . 


3.56 


4.81 


270.5 


4.8196 


. 01801 


.17771 I 


.23325 


. 00O63S8 


. 0008657 



IMPROVEMENT IN QUALITY OF GLUTEN. 



91 



Table 22. — Summary of analyses, showing relation cf proteid nitrogen to gliadin-plus- 

glutenin nitrogt n. 



Percentage Number 
of — of — 


Weight (ingrains) of— 


Range of fi]j 
percentageof ,-' 
gliadin-plus- ™L 
gluteninni- W 

tr °g en - taoln 
nitro- 
gen. 


Pro- 
tei I 
nitro- 
gen. 


An- 
aly- 
ses. 


Ker- 
nels. 


Kernels. 


Gliadin- 

plus-glu- Protei 1 
Average tenin ni- nitrogen 
kernej trogen in ker- 
in km- nels. 
nels. 


i fliadin- „__. . , 

inn mm.- """>-' ■' 
gen in m ayer- 
alerage «^«> 

kernel. ""• 


1.5to2 1.80 

2.S to 3 2.70 

3 and over 3.56 


3.08 
2. 76 
3.08 

3. 04 
4.81 


15 
55 
52 
5 
2 


333 
442. 5 
380. 1 
183. 8 

270.5 


6. 6228 
9. 0243 
7.2520 
3.0696 
4.8196 


0.01939 0.0919S 
.DjiiUi .16392 
.01935 .14041 
.017:14 ,08310 
.01801 .17771 


0. 18748 
.23801 
.21535 

.11243 
. 23325 


0.0002545 
.0003653 
.0004063 
.0004647 

. 0006388 


ii 0005843 
.0005538 
.0005872 
.0006370 
.0008657 



IMPROVEMENT IN THE QUALITY OF THE GLUTEN. 

It is well known that large differences exist in the bread-making 
Tallies of different varieties oi wheats even when they have approxi- 
mately the same gluten content and are raised in the same locality. 
This fact is generally attributed to differences in the quality of the 
gluten. 

W. Farrar" points out the difference in the bread-making qualities 
of two wheats due to the quality of the gluten. He compares Saxon 
Fife wheat, which had a gluten content of 9.92 per cent, and which 
produced 309 pounds of bread from 200 pounds of flour, with Purple 
Straw Tuscan wheat, which had a gluten content of 9.94 per cent, and 
which produced only 278 pounds of bread from the same quantity of 
flour. 

In this case it was not the amount but the quality of the gluten that 
determined the greater excellence of the Saxon Fife wheat. 

It has further been stated by Girard, 6 Snyder,' and Guthrie'' that 
the ratio in which gliadin and glutenin exist in the gluten determines 
its value for bread making. 

It was considered desirable to ascertain whether the proportions 
of these tw r o constituents remain about the same in wheats of high 
and of low r content. If the quality of the gluten remains constant as 
the quantity increases, the value of the wheat for bread making will 
improve in about the same ratio. If, on the other hand, there is a 
tendency for the quality to deteriorate as the quantity increases, 
there would be greater difficulty in effecting improvement. 

In Table 23, analyses of the crop of 1903 are arranged in groups 
according to their content of gliadin plus glutenin. The first group 
comprises all plants having less than 1 per cent, and each succeeding 
group increases by 0.25 per cent. It is followed by Table 24, which 
is a summary of Table 23. 



"Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 9 (1898), pp. 241-250. 

&Compt. Rend., 1S97, p. 876. 

''Minnesota Experiment Station Bulletins 54 and 63. 

tf Agricultural Gazette of New South Wales, 1) (1898), pp. 363-374. 



92 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 23. — Ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of their stun increases. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN. BELOW 1 PER CENT. 



Percentage of— 


Proportion of— Percentage of— 


Record number. G ^ Glia , Un 

glutenin nitrogen. 

nitrogen. 


Glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin. Glutenin. ?™$V 


Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


21205 0.216 

21206 218 

21207 170 

21212 192 

21306 975 

21307 461 

21805 230 

27307 S21 


0.114 
.142 
.099 
.109 
. 505 
.255 
.126 
« .806 
.018 
.629 
.237 


0.102 
.076 
.071 
.083 
.470 
.206 
.104 
.015 
.730 
.026 
.399 


0.52S 0.472 
.651 .349 
.582 .418 
. 567 . 433 
.518 .482 
.447 .553 
.548 .452 
.982 .018 
.024 .976 
.'.11,11 .040 
. 372 . 628 


3. 16 
5.23 
2.96 
2.16 
2.90 
3.04 
2.69 
2.53 
2. 70 
2.54 
2.34 


2.944 

5.012 
2.790 
1.968 
1.925 
2.579 
2.460 
1.709 
1.952 
1.885 
1 . 704 


48806 74S 


55308 655 

81707 636 


Average .. .484 


.276 


.208 


.562 1 .438 


2.93 


2.448 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1 TO 1.25 PER CENT. 



27509 


1.087 
1.227 
L184 


1.072 

.593 

1.078 


0.015 
.634 

.106 


0.986 
.483 

.910 


0.014 

.517 
.090 


2.90 \ 
2.84 
2.92 1 


1.813 

1.613 
1.736 


38005 


43405 


Average .. 


1.166 


.914 


.252 


.793 


.207 


2.89 


1.721 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.25 TO 1.50 PER (EXT. 



•-''.107 

27206... 

37705 

38606 


L.352 

1.465 
1.265 
1.387 
1.336 
1.439 
1 . 287 
1.361 
1.493 
1.470 


0.108 
.815 
.715 
.725 
.586 
.818 
1.057 
1.240 
.899 
.443 


1.244 
.650 
.550 
.662 
.750 
.621 
.230 
.121 
.594 

1.027 


0.080 
.556 
. 565 
.522 
.439 
.568 
.821 
.911 
.602 
.301 


0.920 
.444 
.435 

.478 
.561 
.432 
.179 
.089 
.398 
. 699 


3.92 
2.36 
2. 64 
2.63 
2.74 
2.88 
2.90 
3.58 
2.58 
2.81 


2.568 
.895 
1 . 375 
1.243 
1.404 
1.441 
1.613 
2.219 
1.087 
1.340 


38609 

39405 

44606 


45005 


55606 


55906 


Average . . 


1.385 


.741 


.645 


.536 


.463 


2.90 


1.518 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.50 TO 1.75 PER CENT. 



18905 


1.537 
1 . 555 
1 . 692 
1.700 
1.735 
1.651 
1.555 
1 . 731 
1.504 
L.563 
1.581 
1.561 
L.608 
1 . 658 
1.639 
L.546 
1.683 
1.641 


0.143 
.801 

1.002 

1.073 

1.075 

1.032 

.958 

.962 

. 690 

.057 

.687 

.908 

.632 

.810 

1.177 

1.141 

.965 

1.221 


1.394 
. 754 
.690 
.627 
.660 
.619 
. 597 
.769 
.814 

1.506 
.894 
.653 
.976 
.848 
. 462 
.405 
.718 
.420 


0.093 

.515 
.592 
.631 
.619 
.625 
.616 
.556 
. 459 
.036 
. (35 
.582 
. 393 
.488 
.717 
.738 
. 573 
.744 


0.907 
. 485 
.408 
.369 
.381 
.375 
.384 
.444 
.541 
.964 
.565 
. lis 
.607 
.512 
.283 
.262 
.427 
.256 


3.81 
3.17 
3.17 
2.41 
2.58 
2. 12 
2. 91 
2.82 
2.02 
3.13 
2.60 
1.89 
2.59 
2.30 
2. 61 
2.85 
2.41 
2.41 


2.273 

1.615 

1.478 

.710 

.845 

.469 

1 . 355 

1.089 

.516 

1.567 

1.019 

. 329 

.982 

. 642 

.971 

1 . 304 

.727 

. 769 


22210 

22211 

2721 15 


27305 


27505 


28805 

38608 

18409 

48705 


55008 

55307 


55907 


55909 

57408 


57507 


65306 


81708 

Average . . 


1.619 


.852 


.767 


.523 


.477 


2.65 


1.037 



IMPROVEMENT IN QUALITY OF GLUTEN. 



93 



Table 23. — Ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of their sum increases — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 1.75 TO 2 PER CENT. 



Record number. 


Percentage of — 


Proportion of — 


Percentage of— 


Gliadin- 

plus- 
glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin 

nitrogen. 


Glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Other 
proteid 

nitrogen. 


20707 


1 . 855 
1.996 


' 1.046 
1.125 


0.809 

.871 


0.664 

. 564 


o. 136 

. 436 


2. 77 
2.83 


0.015 

.834 


20710 


21305 


1.91,9 


1.049 


.920 


. 533 


. 167 


2.67 


.701 


21S08 


L.963 


1.046 


.917 


. 53;! 


. 167 


2.57 


.607 


21908 


1.876 


1.015 


.861 


.541 


. 159 


3. 82 


1.011 


21909 


1.976 


1.367 


.609 


.6(17 


.303 


4.43 


2. 454 


22205 


L.969 


1.185 


.784 


. 602 


.398 


2. SI 


.841 


26906 


L.819 


.988 


.831 


.543 


. 457 


2.71 


.891 


26909 


1.879 


.996 


.883 


.531 


.469 


2. SO 


.921 


27005 


1.904 


1.066 


.838 


.559 


.441 


2.<v.\ 


.726 


27207 


L.946 

1.977 


1 . 278 
1.147 


.668 
.830 


.652 
.580 


.348 

, 120 


2.02 
2.70 


.974 
.723 


27506 


28806 


1.864 


.902 


.962 


.484 


.516 


3.02 


1.156 


33605 


1.919 


1.124 


.795 


.585 


. 115 


2.39 


.471 


38505 


1.766 


.862 


. 904 


.488 


.512 


3.61 


1.844 


39205 


1. 845 


1.117 


.728 


.605 


. 305 


2.11 


. 265 


48106 


1.805 


1.035 


.770 


. 573 


.427 


2.38 


. 575 


48305 


1.766 


.996 


.770 


. 564 


. 436 


2.87 


1.104 


48505 


1 . 757 


.965 


.792 


.549 


.451 


3.66 


1.903 


55005 


1.987 


1.102 


.885 


. 555 


. 445 


3.05 


1.063 


55006 


1 . 754 


1.099 


.655 


. 626 


.:i74 


3. 16 


1.406 


55206 


1.866 
' 1 . 974 


.840 

1 . 1142 


1.026 
.932 


.450 
. 528 


.550 
.472 


2.56 
2. is 


.694 
..506 


55305 


55508 


1.959 


1.037 


. 922 


.529 


.471 


3.11 


1.151 


55605 


1.959 
1.750 

1.957 
1.850 


1.044 
. 575 

1.075 
. 883 


.915 

1.175 

.882 

.967 


. 533 
.328 

. 5411 
.477 


.467 
.672 
.451 
.523 


2. 64 
2. 6,7 
2. 12 
2. 51 


.681 

.020 

.41:3 

.66,0 


55905 


55908 


56205 


56206 


L.949 


1.089 


.860 


.559 


.441 


2.42 


.471 


56207 


1 . 827 


.987 


.840 


. 540 


.160 


2.34 


.513 


56208 


L.946 


1.127 


.819 


.579 


.421 


2.61 


. 6,64 


57407 


1 . 858 


. 935 


.923 


.503 


. 107 


2.62 


.762 


65307 


1.815 


1.052 


.763 


.579 


. 121 


2.28 


.465 


65308 


1 . 946 


1.090 


.856 


.560 


.410 


2.09 


.144 


69805 


1.937 

1.770 


1.142 
1.159 


.795 
.611 


.589 
.661 


.411 
.339 


5.82 

1.S1 


3.883 
.040 


80305 


81705 

Average .'. 


1.956 


1.048 


.908 


.535 


i ;. 


1.0S 


.024 


1.SN9 


1.044 


.845 


.552 


.448 


2.82 


.929 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2 TO 2.25 PER CENT. 



17506 


2.226 


1.458 


0.768 


0. 655 


0.345 


3.52 


1.294 


20706 


2.053 
2. 146 


1.089 
1.154 


.964 
.992 


.530 
.537 


.470 
.463 


2. 7S 
3.24 


.727 
1.094 


21208 


21807 


2.110 


1.171 


.936 


. 556 


.444 


2. 73 


. 620 


21809 


2. 17S 


1.183 


.995 


. 543 


.457 


2. 73 


.552 


21811 


2. 156 


1.144 


1.012 


.531 


.46,0 


3. 75 


1.594 


21812 


2.023 
2.141 


1.139 
1.045 


.884 

1.006 


.563 
.488 


. 437 
.512 


4.26 

4.04 


2.237 
1.899 


21813 


21905 


2.181 


1.344 


.837 


.616 


.384 


2.64 


.459 


21906 


2.096 


1.208 


.888 


.576 


. 124 


3. 18 


1.084 


21907 


2. 146, 


1.187 


. 959 


.553 


.447 


3. 35 


1.204 


22206 


2.113 


1.271 


.S42 


.601 


.399 


3.22 


1.107 


22208 


2.142 


1.309 


.833 


.611 


.389 


3. IS 


1.038 


26905 


2. 087 


1.197 


.890 


.573 


.427 


2. 76 


.673 


26908 


2. 15S 


1.250 


.908 


.579 


.421 


2.06 


.802 


33107 


2. 123 


1.283 


.840 


.604 


.396 


2.35 


.227 


37707 


2.097 


1.044 


1.053 


.498 


.502 


2.93 


. 833 


39506 


2.065 


1.281 


.784 


.620 


.380 


2.93 


.865 


40505 


2. ISO 


1.143 


1.046 


.522 


. 178 


2.82 


.631 


46107 


' 2.076 


1.164 


.912 


.561 


. 430 


2.54 


.464 


48306 


2. 135 
2. 249 


1.130 
1.290 


1.005 
.959 


.529 
.574 


.471 
. 426 


3.29 

4.S7 


1.155 
2. 621 


48406 


48506 


2.171 


1.104 


1.067 


.508 


. 492 


3. 20 


1.029 


55007 


2.211 


1 . 24S 


.963 


.564 


.436 


4.21 


1.999 


55506 


2.197 


1.136 


1.061 


.517 


.483 


2.80 


.603 


55507 


2.070 
2.118 


1.079 
1.277 


.991 
.841 


.521 
.603 


.470 
.397 


2. t',:; 
2.73 


.560 
.612 


56105 


56106 


2.091 


1.091 


1.000 


.522 


.478 


2. 57 


.479 


56107 


2.234 


1.033 


1.201 


.462 


. 538 


2. 96 


.726 


56209 


2.208 


1.161 


1.047 


.526 


.474 


2.7,0 


.382 





94 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 23. — Ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of their sum increases — Continued. 
GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2 TO 2.25 PER CENT— Continued. 



Record number. 


Percentage of — 


Proportion of— 


Percentage of— 


Gliadin- 

plus- 
glutenin 

nitrogen. 


Gliadin 
nitrogen. 


Glutenin 
nitrogen. 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


57007 

57406 

57508 

58805 


2.093 
2. 134 
2. 053 
2.112 
2.199 
2. 1M 
2.046 
2.029 
2.034 


1.159 

1.080 
1.124 
1.060 
1.186 
1.142 
1.016 
1.223 
1.701 


0.934 

1.054 

.929 

1.052 

1.013 

1.039 

1.030 

.806 

.333 


0.553 
.506 

. 547 
.501 
.539 
.528 
.496 
.602 
.816 


0.447 
.494 
.453 
.499 
.461 
.472 
.504 
.398 
.184 


2.65 
2.75 
2.21 
2.74 
2.79 
2.63 
2.30 
4.45 
2.71 


0. 557 
.616 
.157 
.628 
.591 
.449 
.254 

2.421 
.676 


63106 


66005 .. 


74f06 .. 


76206 . 


81706 

Average . . 


2.130 


1.187 


.943 


.557 


.443 


3.05 


.921 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2.25 TO 2.50 PER CENT. 



20709 


2.313 

2. 259 
2.281 
2. 324 
2. 424 
2.407 
2. 446 
2.443 
2.293 
2.344 
2.492 
2. 467 


1.307 
1.215 
1.377 
1.247 
1.356 
1.182 
1.391 
1.230 
1.20S 
1.203 
1.313 
1.195 


1.006 
1.044 
.'.KI4 
1.077 
1.058 
1.225 
1.055 
1.213 
1.085 
1.141 
1.179 
1.272 


0.565 
. 538 
.604 
.537 
.563 
.491 
.569 
.503 
. 527 
.511 
.526 
.484 


0.435 
.462 
.396 
.463 
.437 
.509 
.431 
.497 
.473 
.489 
.474 
.516 


3.05 
3.32 
3.09 
2.64 
3.07 
3.41 
3.22 
4.33 
2.96 
2.80 
3.09 
3.01 


0.737 

1.061 
.809 
.316 
.646 

1.003 
.774 

1.887 
.667 
.456 
.598 
.543 


20805 

28808 


27508 .. 


28206 


33305 

33607 


34405.. 


37305 


57506 

58207 

58705 


Average . . 


2.374 


1.268 


1.105 


. 535 


.465 


3.16 


.791 



GLIADIN-PLUS-GLUTENIN NITROGEN, 2.50 PER CENT AND OVER. 



40205 


3.089 


1.850 


1.219 


0. 603 


0.397 


4.69 


1.621 


42205 


2. 728 


1.480 


1.248 


. 542 


.458 


3.63 


.902 


57805 


2.684 


1.303 


1.381 


.485 


.515 


2.87 


.186 


57905 


2. 918 


1.573 


1.345 


. 539 


.461 


3.18 


.262 


72607 


2.515 


1.459 


1 . 056 


. 579 


.421 


5.59 


3.075 


81505 


2. 652 


L.066 


1.586 


.401 


.599 


2.94 


.288 


92306 

Average . . 


4.083 


2.388 


1.675 


.587 


.413 


4.93 


.867 


2.947 


1.588 


1.358 


.534 


.466 


3.98 


1.029 



Table 24. 



-Summary of analyses, showing the ratio of gliadin to glutenin as the content of 
their sum increases. 





Percent- 
age of 

gliadin- 
plus- 

glutenin 

nitrogen. 


Percentage of— 


Proportion of — 


Percentage of— 


Range of percentage 

of L'liadin-plus- 
glutenin nitrogen. 


Number 

analyses Glia ' lin G . lutenin 
analyses. llitrogen . nitrogen. 


Gliadin. 


Glutenin. 


Proteid 
nitrogen. 


Other 
proteid 
nitrogen. 




0.484 
1.166 

1 . 385 
1.619 
1.889 

2. 130 
2. :-!74 
2. 947 


1 1 0. 276 0. 208 
3 .914 .252 

10 .741 .645 
18 1 .852 .767 
37 l.(»44 .845 
39 1.187 .943 

12 1.268 1.105 
7 1 . 588 1 . 358 


0.562 

. 793 
. 536 
. 523 
.552 
.557 
.535 
.534 


0. 438 
.207 
.463 

.477 
.448 
.443 
. 465 
.466 


2.93 
2.89 
2.90 
2.65 
2.S2 
3.05 
3.16 
3.98 


2. 448 


1 to 1.25 


1.721 


1 25 to 1.50 


1.518 


1.50 to 1.75... 


1.037 


1.75 to 2 

2 to 2. 25 


. 929 
. 921 


2.25 l" 2.50 


.791 


2.50 and over 


1.029 



It will be seen from Table 24 that the ratio of gliadin to glutenin 

remains practically the same as the percentage of their sum increases. 

It would therefore be safe to assume that an increase in the gluten 



BREEDING TO INCREASE PROTEID NITROGEN. 95 

content of a given variety of wheat raised in the same region would 
carry with it a corresponding improvement in its value for bread 
making, although there might be fluctuations from year to year in 
quality of gluten, as there is in the quantity. 

If the quality of gluten is determined by the ratio of gliadin and 
glutenin of which it is composed, it is likely that there is some certain 
proportion that is most desirable. Unfortunately, the investigators 
who have taken up this subject do not by any means agree upon the 
proper ratio. Should this be ascertained there would be ample oppor- 
tunity for the selection of individual plants in which the proportion 
of gliadin and glutenin would approximate the ideal. There would 
thus be possible a much more rapid improvement in the quality of 
wheat than can be accomplished by confining selection to an increase 
in the gluten. 

An obstacle to the usefulness of these determinations in the whole 
wheat appears in the announcement by Nasmith, already cited, that 
while gliadin occurs in all portions of the endosperm, glutenin does 
not appear in the aleurone cells. That being the case, it is difficult to 
believe that any given ratio between these constituents in the whole 
wheat could be taken as the one most desirable. The ratio in the 
gluten alone may, however, have an important influence on its 
quality, and a certain definite proportion of each may produce an 
ideal gluten. 

In the light of the present knowledge on the subject, a mechanical 
determination of gluten would seem to be most useful, if it can be 
made with such small quantities of wheat as are obtained from 
single plants, while determinations of gliadin and glutenin in the 
gluten would afford a means of judging of its quality. 

SOME RESULTS OF BREEDING TO INCREASE THE CONTENT OF 
PROTEID NITROGEN. 

Selected plants have been grown on a large scale for two years. 
From these results it is very apparent that a high percentage of 
nitrogen and the qualities that go with it are transmissible from one 
generation to another. 

In Table 25 are analyses of the plants of the crop of 1902, grouped 
according to their proteid nitrogen content into classes of from 1 to 2 
per cent, 2 to 2.5 per cent, and increasing by 0.5 per cent up to 4.5 
per cent and above. Opposite the plant number of each plant of the 
crop of 1902 are stated its percentage of proteid nitrogen and weight 
of proteid nitrogen in kernels. On the same line are the plant 
numbers for the entire progeny in 1903, and following these are the 
percentage of proteid nitrogen, weight of proteid nitrogen per average 
kernel, and average weight of kernel for all of these progeny. 

The averages for each group are given in Table 26. 



96 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 2.5. — Analyses showing transmission o^ nitrogen from one generation to another a 
1 TO 2 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



1902 


1903 


Record Dum- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 

(gram). 


32201 


1.51 
1.99 
1.98 
1.91 
1.97 
1.12 
1.83 
1.33 
1.67 
1.38 
1.63 
1.73 
1.89 
L.99 
1.92 






32206-7 


2.64 

2.62 

2.17 

2.39 

2.50 

2. 586 

3.09 

2.628 

2.814 

2.67 

2.576 

2.27 

1.87 

2.85 

2. 498 


0. 001005.5 
.0015963 

. 0007499 
. 0009348 
. 0003874 
.0016918 
.0010830 
.0024129 
.0024540 
. 0006790 
. 0022132 
. O00S092 
.0016125 
. 0025361 
. 0026506 


0.03874 


32601 






3260.5-6 and 8. . . 

6350.5-6 

69505-6 

69705 


.07560 


63501 






.03502 


69501 






.03894 


6' 171 11 






.01550 


73301 






73306-S 

91905-6 


.06582 


91901 






.03513 


92401 


92405-9 


.09109 


92901 






92905-9 


.08814 


94101 






94105 

94205-9 


.02543 


94201 






.08738 


94401 






94406-7 


. 03538 


94601 






94605-6 

94905-9 


.08851 


94901 






.08899 


95501 






95505-10 

Average . 


. 10605 










Average. . 


1.658 






2.587 


. 0004960 


.019907 









a In this table the average percentage of proteid nitrogen for all plants raised in 1903, resulting from 
plants of 1 to 2 percent, 2" to 2.5 per cent, etc., in 1902 is determined by adding together analyses of 
all plants in that group and dividing by the total number, irrespective of families. 

2 TO 2.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



17401 


2.45 
2.28 
2.33 




1740[5-6] [8-10] . 
34205-8 


2.646 
2.857 
2.54 


0. 0025803 
. 0023077 
. 001S351 


0. 09807 


34 9 01 




.ON 175 


57301 


0. 000601 


0. 02585 


57305-8 


.07(11(1 




Average . 




Average. . 


2.353 


. 000601 


. 025S5 


2.68 


. 00051716 


. 019146 



2.5 TO 3 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



21701. 
33401 . 



Average. . 



2.50 
2.73 



21705-11. 

3: 1 K 15 v. 



Average . 



0. 0042343 
.0014277 



. 0005147 



0. 15101 

.07274 



3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 





3.04 

3.14 
3.31 
3.22 
3. 49 
3.05 
3.10 
3. 17 
3.28 
3.24 
3.12 
3.00 
3. 31 
3.06 
3. 33 
3. 22 

3. OS 

3. in 
3. is 
3.13 
3. 44 
3.21 
3.09 
3. 33 
3.31 
3, 1 1 
3.11 






L7305 8 


3.207 

4.006 

3.64 

2.86 

3.32 

3.015 

3. 13 

3.527 

2.768 

2.63 

2.56 

2.93 

2.96 

2.73 

3.41 

2. 606 

4.33 

3.12 

3.88 

2.96 

2.636 

2. 48 

3. 25 

2.59 

2. SS 

4.69 
3.11 


0. 0025519 
.0O2i77S 
. 0010439 
.00341S1 
.0006999 
.0021798 
.0054513 
. 0060008 
.002594.3 
.0004984 
.0016114 
.0022229 
.0013685 
. 0015199 
.0007126 
.0017186 

.01 904 

. 0007295 
.0005881 

.001. ".MOO 
.0009112 
.0013476 
.0005148 

.i 6027 

.0008776 
. 0006255 


0. 07920 








17505 7 


.05595 








18905-6 


.02863 


20701 






20705-10 

20805 


. 12074 








.02157 


21301 






2130.', 8 

21805 13 

2190[5-9] [11-13] 
26905-9. 


. 07278 


21801 






.17668 


21901 






. L6783 


26901 






.09357 








.01895 








27205-7 


.06311 








27305-8 


.07654 








28805-6 


.04623 








3310.-, 7 


.05574 










.02090 








33605 7 


.06614 




0. 000909 
. 000948 
. 000827 
. 000854 
. 000685 
.O0OS31 
. 000844 
. 000693 
. 000933 
.001017 
.000914 


0. 02956 
. 02749 
. 02602 
.02731 
.01995 
.02599 
. 02732 
. 02081 
.02820 
. 03271 
.02942 




.01994 


34601 


34606 


.02213 






.01880 




37701 


37305 

3770.-, 7 


.01987 

. 05837 


37901 


37905-6 

38505-6 




38501 


.01227 


38701 


38706 


.019SS 


39401 


3910.-. 


.02093 


40201 




.01871 


40301 


10305 


.02011 



BREEDING TO INCREASE PROTEID NITROGEN. 



97 



Table 25. — Analysis showing transmission of nitrogen from one gt neration to another 

Continued. 

3 TO 3.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 





190 


g 






i!>o:s 




Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 

proteid 
nil rogen 

in ker- 
nel. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in average 

kernel 
(gram). 


Weight of 
average 

kernel 
(gram). 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percenl 

age of 
proteid 
nit rogen 

in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weigh 1 of 
average 
kernel 

(gram). 


40401 


3. 32 
3. 23 
3.46 
3.37 

3. 24 
3. 37 

3. 33 
3. 16 
3. 49 
3. 16 
3.36 
3. 43 
:;. 19 
3. 36 
3. 33 
3.119 
3. 45 
3. 25 
3.05 
3. 22 
■i. 26 
3. 10 
3. 35 
3.31 
3. 30 
3.15 
3.14 
3. 23 
3. 05 
3. 30 
3.14 
3.15 
3.46 
3. 12 
3.16 
3.02 
3.22 
3. 17 
3.03 
3.31 
3. 26 
3. 13 
3.25 
3.17 
3.06 
3.23 
3. 36 
3.42 
3. 39 
3.10 
3.36 
3.38 
3.24 
3.14 
3. 48 
3.49 
3.29 


0.001039 
.001050 
.0(10972 
.000933 
.(1(10(11)7 
. 000772 
.000899 
.000853 
.001005 
.000866 
.000820 
. 000888 

.1)0(1791 
. 000937 
.000789 
. 000902 
. 000928 
. 000859 
. 000930 
. 000805 
. 000808 
.0007N7 
. 000958 
. 000894 
. 000785 
. 000781 
.000X32 

.000920 

. 000723 
. 000990 


0.03)36 
.03250 
.02813 

. 02766 
.02800 
.02299 
.02701 
.112701 
.02882 
.02748 
.02115 
.02595 
.02488 
.02707 
• .02 177 
.02928 

.02697 
.02661 
. 03052 
.02507 
.02485 
.02548 

.02860 

. 02941 
.023X1 
. 02485 
. 02665 
. 02S46 
. 02379 
.03000 


40405 

40505 

42205-6 

42905 


3.17 

2. 82 
2.54 
3. 17 
2.92 
4.13 
2.73 
2.38 
3.08 
3.065 
3.06 
2.70 
3.24 

3. 17 
1.34 
3. 255 
2.83 
2. 27 
2. 558 
2.75 

2. 495 
2.70(1 
2.76 
2.49 
2.60 
2.88 
2.95 
3.01 
2.43 
2.14 

3. 25 
2.925 
3.25 
4.42 
:;. 74 
2.47 
3. 155 
4.04 
2. 9.37 
3.01 
2.48 
1.98 
2. 78 
2. 486 
3.40 
1.81 
2.965 
2.94 
2.48 
2.875 
2.63 
2. 595 
2.566 
2.74 
2.67 
3.93 
2.58 


0.0004352 
.0006892 

.ooos'.iss 

.11005117 
. 0006594 
.0006423 
.0016171 
.0004567 
.(1012X67 
.0021750 
.0010077 
.0004877 
.0006149 
.0010793 
. 0002422 
.0023714 
. 0010373 
.0017313 
. 0028162 
.0014369 
. 0025326 
.0013974 
. 0002527 
. 0019599 
. 0021279 
. 0006767 
. 0008052 
. 0003258 
. 0003292 
. 0007684 
. 0003938 
. 0024199 
.0017773 
. 0008767 
.0016495 
. 0005531 
.0019005 
.0021643 
.0026515 
. 0005738 
. 0003930 
. 0004054 
.0014234 
.0013768 
. 0009400 
. 0003919 
.0010576 
. 0005704 
. 0005067 
.0011244 
. 0007556 
. 0008522 
. 0026832 
. 0009933 
.0020214 
. 0012908 
. 0013009 


0.01373 


40501 

42201 


.02444 

.1)3231 


42901 


.01866 


43401 

43501 

41601 

4S101 

48301 


43405 

4.3505 

44605-7 

48106 

48305-6 


.02258 
.01555 

.05X9(1 
.01919 
.012.35 


48501 


48505-8 


.0725.3 


18701 . 


48705-6 


. 03287 


48801 . . 


48806 


.01798 


49501 

5071)1 


49505 

50705-6 


.01898 
. 03329 


51001 


51005 


01804 


55001 


55005-8 


.07205 


55201 . . . 


55205-6 


. 03688 


55301 . . . 


55305 X. 


.07496 


55901 . . . 


55905-9... 


.11169 


56101 


56105-7 


. 0523.3 


56201 . . . 


56205-9 


. 10169 


57001 

57101 


57005-7 

57105 


.05174 
.00916 


57401 . . . 


57405-8 


. 07892 


57501 . . . 


57506-9 


. 0S396 


5821 1 1 


5S206-7 


.02318 


58501 


58505 


.02730 


58701 




. 01082 


58901 


59605-6 


. 01355 


59601 . . . 


. 03592 


62801 


62805 


.01212 


65301 






65305-8 


. 08003 


66001 






66005-6,8 

69305 


. 05529 


69301 






.01984 


69801 . . . 






69805-6 


.04373 


71901 . . 






71905 


. 02239 


72401 







72405-6 


.05892 


72601 






72605-7 


. 05274 


72701 






72705-8 


.0X9X1 


72801 






72806 


.01906 


72901 






72905 


.01585 


74301 






74305 

74506-8 


. 02047 


74501 






. 05084 


74601 






74605-7 


. 05562 


76201 






76205-6 


.02912 


80301 






80305 


. 02165 


81401 






8140.5-6 


.03583 


81.501 






81505 


.01940 


84401 








.02043 


84901 






84905-6 


. 03902 


S5201 


85205-6 


. 02937 


86101 






8610.5-6 


. 03244 


88601 






88605-9 


.11179 


88901 






88905-6 


. 03625 


92201 






92205-8 


.07575 


92301 








. 03223 


95701 


95705-7 


.05017 








Average . 




Average . 


3. 239 


. 000875 


. 02700 


2.932 


. 00056037 


.0191X9 



3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



18801 


3. 55 
3. 50 
3.65 
3. 63 
3.76 
3.58 






18805 

21205-12 

22205-11 

25205-6 


2.02 
3. 567 
3. 165 
2. 7.35 
3.19 
2. 688 


0. 0003164 
. 0054768 

. 0037042 
.0011X94 
.0015273 
.002X791 


0.01567 


21201 






. 15672 


22201 






.11711 


25201 






. 04347 


26101 






26105-7 


.05113 


27501 






27505-9 


. 10761 











27889— No. 78—05- 



98 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 25. — Analyses showing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to another — 

Continued. 

3.5 TO 4 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN— Continued. 



ino-i 


1003 


Record num- 
ber. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


Percent- w_*„5J 
age of Pr °teid 

Record num- proteid ; ™ trogren 
ber. n]trogen »£*»■■ 

nell | fe ram >- 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram). 


33901 


3.59 
3.82 
3.79 
3.98 
3. 65 
3. 55 

3. 63 
3. 57 
3.79 
3. 87 
3. 55 
3.87 
3. 53 
3.61 
3.55 
3. 79 
3. 71 i 
3.80 

3. 64 
3.80 
3. 53 
3.91 
3.78 




' 33905-6. 2 21 


0. 0008932 

.0005135 
.0036318 
. 0004407 
.0013536 
.0003177 
. 0006927 
. nnnsis7 


04115 


38001 


0. 000806 
.001046 
.001039 
. 001048 
. 000927 
.001327 
. 000796 
.001020 
. 001238 
.00O.S65 
.001146 
.000993 
.001043 
.001020 
.001050 
. 001030 
.000891 
. 000852 
. 000904 
. 000759 


0.02110 38005 1 2.84 

.02765 38605-9 3.718 

.02616 39205 2.11 


01808 


38601 


09917 


39201 


02089 


39501 


.02877 

.02619 


39506 7 2.975 


04568 


39601 


m'iooo 2 37 




42401 


.02838 42405 3.07 

.02531 1 44505 2.94 


02251 


44301 


01764 


45001 


.02690 , 45005... 3.58 0004027 


01376 


15601 


.03205 1 4560.5-6 .. 2 365 


. 0006777 
.0007155 
.0002700 
.0020794 

. 0010640 
.0016285 
. 0022356 
.0015451 
. 0005207 
. 0003556 
.0009317 
.0003180 
. 0016570 
.0031019 
.0007197 
.001 74X3 


02995 


45701 


. 02435 

. 02963 

.02822 

.02898 

. 02866 

.11277.-1 

. 02750 

.02353 

.0234S 

.02384 | 

.02155 


45705 4 18 


01712 


45801 


45805 1.84 

48405-9 2.90 


.012.34 


48401 


.07511 


49901 


55506-8 ' 2.846 


02939 


5551 1] 


. 05743 


55601 

57601 


55605-8 2.555 

57606-8 ' 2.37 


. 08822 
. 06535 


57801 


57805 2. 87 


01814 


57901 


57905 3.18 


.01118 


58801 

60601 


58805-6 | 2.31 

60605 1.87 

6310.5-7 ! 2.82 

81705-10 1 2.27 

91305. 3.21 


. 04048 
. 01701 


63101 


05951 


81701 




1 


. 1.3635 


91301 . . . 


3. 57 
3.56 






. 02242 


92501 

Average . 






92505-7... 3.32 


.05312 










3.68 


. 000990 

• 


.02050 


Average. 2.906 

1 


. 0005508 


.019204 



4 TO 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



26801 


4.07 
4.30 
4.00 






26805-8... 


2.825 


0. 0023073 


0. 08179 


28201 






28206 


3.07 .0006126 1 
2.69 .0014772 


.01996 


46101 


0. 000988 


0.02472 


46105-7 


. 05495 




Average . 




Average . 


4.123 


.000988 


.112172 


2.806 


.0005496 


. 019588 



MORE THAN 4.5 PER CENT PROTEID NITROGEN. 



50901 


4.95 


0.001074 


0.02171 


50905-6 


3. 435 


0. 0008992 


0. 02001 






Average . 








Average . 


3. 435 


. 0004496 


. 010005 











Table 26.- 



-Summary of analyses, showing transmission of nitrogen from one generation to 
another. 





190S 


1903 


Range of percentage of 
proteid nitrogen. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram) . 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


1 to 2 


1.66 
2.35 
2.61 
3.24 
3.68 
4.12 
4.95 


15 
3 
2 
84 
31 
3 
1 






2.59 
2.68 
2.49 
2.93 
2.91 
2.81 
3. 43 


46 
13 
11 
199 
79 
8 
2 


0. 0004960 
. 0005172 
.0005147 
.(1(111500.1 
. O0O550S 
. 0005496 
. 0004496 


0. 01991 


2 to 2.5 


0. 000601 


0. 02585 


.01915 


2. 5 to 3 


. 02032 


3 to 3.5 .. 


.000875 


02700 


.01919 


3. 5 to 4 . . 


. 000990 02650 


. 01920 


4 to 4. 5 . . 


.(UN KISS 

.001074 


.02472 
.02171 


. 01959 




.01000 







BREEDING TO INCREASE PROTEID NITROGEN. 



99 



In Table 26 the averages for each group are stated. This table is 
designed to show whether there has been a tendency for plants of a 
certain class to reproduce the qualities pertaining to that class, or 
whether these are lost in the offspring. 

It is unfortunate that there are not a greater number of analyses of 
plants of medium and of low nitrogen content. The plants selected 
for reproduction in 1903 were largely those of high nitrogen content, 
and, consequently, comparatively few analyses of the low nitrogen 
and medium nitrogen plants of 1903 are at hand. 

Table 25 shows that in the main there is a tendency for each class 
of plants to reproduce in the same relation to the other classes, but 
that there is less difference between the extreme classes in the off- 
spring than in the parent plants. In other words, while all plants 
tend to reproduce their own qualities, those plants varying widely 
from the average produce, in general, offspring varying from the 
average less widely than did the parents. Although this is a rule, its 
application to the individual is not universal. Certain plants may be 
found whose tendency to variation extends through both generations. 
There is also wide variation between certain plants of the same 
parent. For instance, the plants numbered from 21205 to 21212, all 
of which come from the same parent, vary from 2.16 to 5.23 per cent 
in proteid nitrogen content, while plants 69805 and 69S06 vary from 
5.82 to 1.66 per cent in this constituent/' 

It would seem, therefore, entirely reasonable to believe that a very 
considerable increase in the proteid nitrogen content of wheat may be 
effected by careful and continuous reproduction from plants of high 
proteid nitrogen content. 

Table 27 contains the analyses of plants raised in 1902 and their, 
progeny raised in 1903, arranged according to the number of grams of 
proteid nitrogen contained in the average kernel of the former. 

Table 27. — Analyses showing transmission of proteid nitrogen in average kernel. 





1902 1903 


Range of proteid nitrogen 
in average kernel 
(gram). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Weight 

of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


0.000600 to 0.000700 

0.000700 to 0.000800 

O.OOOSOO to 0.000900 

0.000900 to 0.001000 

0.001000 and over 


0. 000659 
. 000776 
.000850 
. 000938 
. 001077 


3 
9 
18 
18 
15 


3.03 
3.29 

3. 33 
3.37 
3.71 


0. 02220 
. 02405 
. 02576 
. 02796 
.02S80 


0. 000496 
. 000444 
. 000544 
. 000514 
. 000593 


8 
15 
38 
35 
28 


2.59 
2.68 
2.91 
2.89 
3.06 


0.01895 
.01673 
. 01875 
.01784 
. 01905 











" Table 25 represents the properties of each plant grown in 1903 arranged according to 
immediate families. For instance, plants numbered 1730.5-17308 are all the offspring of 
the same plant grown in 1902. The parent bears the number 17301. This is the system 
of records devised by Prof. W. M. Hays, formerly of the University of Minnesota. 



100 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 28. — Analyses showing transmission of kernel, wt ight. 



Range of weight of aver- 
age kernel (gram). 



Below 0.024... 
0.024 to 0.026.. 
0.026 to 0.028.. 
0.028 to 0.030.. 

0.030 and over 



1902 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 




Percent- 


Proteid ! 


Num- 


age of 


nitrogen 


ber of 


proteid 


in aver- 


anal- 


nitrogen 


age ker- 


yses. 


in ker- 


nel 




nels. 


(gram). 


0. 022.53 


12 


3.61 


0.000811 


.02515 


12 


3. 28 


.000813 


. 02709 


18 


3.43 


.000927 


. 02878 


16 


3.41 


.000993 


.03152 


6 


3.31 


.001044 



1 903 



Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 



Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 



0.01684 
.01740 
.01947 
.01875 
. 01869 



Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 



Proteid 
nitrogen 

in aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 



2.69 
2.88 
2.91 
2.98 
2.96 



0. 000450 
. 000503 
. 000562 

.000573 
. 000548 



Table 28 shows the analyses of plants raised in 1902 and their prog- 
eny raised in 1903, arranged according to weight of average kernel. 
There is more variation in this table than in the preceding one, but 
the tendency toward transmission of proteid nitrogen in the average 
kernel may be noted. The averages for 1902 are much higher than 
for 1903, owing partly to the higher percentage and partly to greater 
kernel weight. 

The weight of the average kernel shows some tendency toward 
transmission, although there are some variations. It will be noticed 
that the kernels average much heavier in 1902 than in 1903, and that 
in spite of this the percentage of proteid nitrogen is higher in 1902. 
The relation of light kernel and high percentage of nitrogen does not 
therefore appear to hold as between crops of different years. 

All of the qualities of which determinations have been made in 
both years appear to be transmitted. It may be safely assumed that 
certain plants will have greater power to transmit these qualities than 
will the average plant. Such plants will assert themselves in the 
course of three or four generations. From these plants individuals 
may be selected that have a combination of the desired qualities. 

YIELD OF GRAIN AS AFFECTED BY SUSCEPTIBILITY TO COLD. 

As has already been stated, a large number of plants on the breed- 
ing plots were killed during the winter of 1902-3. This afforded an 
opportunity to ascertain the effect of the severe weather upon the 
surviving plants. The question arose whether the surviving plants of 
a family of which a large percentage of members were killed yielded 
less per plant than the plants of a family of which but a small per- 
centage had succumbed. As each spike of the crop of 1902 was 
represented by a number of plants, and as records of each plant 
were available, there were very extensive data at hand from which 
to secure information on the subject. 

In Table 29 the surviving plants of each immediate family, or, in 
other words, the surviving plants descended from the same plant of 
the previous year, are classified according to the percentage of plants 
that survived the winter. Thus all plants of which only from 10 to 20 



YIELD AS AFFECTED BY SUSCEPTIBILITY T< > COLD. 



101 



per cent survived are grouped together. In the next class are all 
plants of which from 20 to 30 per cent survived. The other classes 
increase by 10 per cent surviving plants until 70 per cent is reached. 
All plants of which more than 70 per cent survived form the last class. 

Table 30 gives a summary of Table 29, the averages for each class 
being shown. From this table it will be seen that with an increase 
in the proportion of surviving plants there is an increase in the 
weight of grain per plant and in the number of kernels per plant. 
It is therefore to be concluded that decrease in yield from winter- 
killing is due not only to the loss of plants that are destroyed, but 
also to a decreased yield from most of the surviving plants. 

Table 30 also shows that the weight of the average kernel is not 
affected b}* the freezing of a large proportion of the family, the 
decreased yield being due, it may be assumed, to the decreased 
number of kernels, owing to a decreased ability to tiller. 

With an increase in the proportion of surviving plants there is, 
perhaps, a slight decrease in the percentage of proteid nitrogen in 
the kernels and in the number of grams of proteid nitrogen in the 
average kernel, although this is so slight and so irregular that it 
would not be safe to draw any conclusions from it. The total pro- 
duction of proteid nitrogen per plant naturally increases. 

Table 29. — Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family. 
10 TO 20 PER CKNT. 



Record number 
for 1902. 


Percent- 
age of 
plants 
in 1903 
surviv- 
ing from 
1902. 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels 
(gram). 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


18801 


11.1 

10.0 
IS. 2 
16.7 
16.7 
14.3 
16.7 
16.7 
14.3 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
14.3 
16.7 
14.3 
14.3 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
16.7 
14.3 
14.3 


2. 1462 
14.6942 
7. 7295 
2.9905 
6. 1394 
2.5134 
21.5399 
9.3541 
3. 6302 

.6316 
1.2499 
2. 8000 
5.9990 
3. 2340 

.7532 
1.5298 
1.2716 

.6760 
15.5835 
3. 7263 
7.4516 
2. 5436 
2.3031 

.5952 
1.3451 
2.0430 
4.4222 
8. 7448 
3.0940 

.5595 


137 
697 
363 
156 
309 
139 
1,031 
447 
194 

46 

67 
124 
340 
235 

44 
124 

67 

23 
862 
407 
273 
235 
170 

35 
111 
103 
216 
428 
138 

22 


0.01567 
.02157 
.112173 
.01858 
.01987 
.01S0S 
. 02089 
.02093 
.01871 
.01373 
.0i866 
.02258 
.01764 

.013711 
.01712 
.01234 
.01898 
.02939 
.01804 
.00916 
. 02730 
.01082 
.01355 
.01701 
.01212 
.01984 
.02047 
. 02043 
.022)2 
. 02543 


2.C2 

3. 32 

2. 7:: 

2.73 
2.96 
2. M 

2. 1 1 
2.88 

4. 69 
3.17 
3.17 
2.92 
2.94 
3.5S 
4. IS 
1.84 
3.24 

3. 62 
1.34 
2. 76 
2.95 
3.01 

2. 43 
1.87 

3. 25 

4. 12 
1.98 
2.48 
3.21 
2.67 


0. 04335 
. 18784 
. 20732 
. 07566 
. 18173 
.07138 
. 45435 
.21399 
. 17026 
.02002 
. 03650 
.08176 
.17HH7 
.11575 
.03148 
.02815 
.04120 
.02436 
.20881 
. 10285 
.21982 
.07656 
. 05596 
.01113 
.04272 
.09030 
. 08756 
. 21687 
.09932 
.01494 


0.0003164 
. 0006999 
. 0005947 
.0005066 
.000o881 
. 0005135 
. 0004407 
. 0006027 
.0008776 
.0004352 
.000.5447 
.0006594 
.0005187 
.0004927 
. 0007155 
. 0002700 
. 0006149 
.0010640 
.0002422 
.0002527 
.0008052 
.0003258 
. 0003292 
.0003180 
.0003938 
.0008767 
. 0004054 
.0005067 
.0007197 
. 0006790 


20801 . . 


25201 


33301 


:i730l 


38001 


39201 


39401 


40201 


40401 


42901 


43401 


14501 


45001 


45701 


45801 


49501 


49901 


51001 


57101 


58501... 


58701 


58901....- 


60(101 


62801 


69301 


74301 


84401 


91301 


94101... 


Average . . 


15. 78 


4. 709S 


251.4 


.01856 


2.91 


. 12294 


.00051366 



102 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 29. — Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family — Cont'd. 

20 TO 30 PER CENT. 



Record number 
for 1902. 


Percent- 
age of 
plants 
in 1903 
surviv- 
ing from 
1902. 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram) . 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age 

kernel 

(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels 
(gram). 


Proteid 

nitrogen 

in average 

kernel 

(gram). 


18901 

27001 

31601 


20.0 
20.0 
28.6 
20.0 
28.6 
25.0 
20.0 
25.0 
20.0 
25.0 
28.6 
25.0 
20.0 
25.0 
28.6 
20.0 
20.0 
20.0 
22. 2 
28.6 


1.2046 
16.4120 
6. 1962 
.5.0200 
4.6383 
3.6003 
t. 1546 
1.0827 
1.4892 
1.4464 
5. 2800 
9.8346 

1.8088 

2.4731 
12.5470 
28. 2136 
15. 7835 
2. 8327 
3.4961 
6. 2877 


84 

866 

280 

267 

346 

179 

170 

59 

66 

93 

321 

517 

270 

221 

626 

1,260 

729 


0.01431 
.0180.5 
.022 13 
.01880 
.01341 
.02011 
. 02444 
.01615 
.022.51 
.01555 
.01643 
.01708 
.01814 
.01118 
. 02024 
.02230 
.0216.5 


3.64 
2. 63 
3.12 
3.88 
2.37 
3.11 
2.82 
2.54 
3.07 
4.13 
3.06 
2.70 
2.87 
3.18 
2.31 
2.47 
1.81 


0. 04437 
. 43164 
. 19332 
. 19478 
.10967 
.11197 
.11716 
. 03587 
. 04572 
. 05974 
. 16124 
. 26553 
. 14060 
.07859 
.33541 
. 69688 
. 28569 


0. 0005219 
. 0004984 
. 0006904 
. 0007295 
. 0003177 
. 0006255 
. 0006892 
. 0004494 
. 0006927 
.0006423 
.0005038 
. 0004877 
.0005207 
.0003556 
. 0004658 
.0005531 
.0003910 
.000.5704 
.0005415 
.0008062 


36901 

39601 


40301 

(0.5(11 

42201 

42401 

43501 

48701 

48801 


57801 

57901 

58801 

71901 

80301 


81501 

91901 


146 .oi'.no 

199 .017.56 
106 .0442.5 


2.04 .08328 
3.09 | .10771 
1.87 .11373 


94601 

Average. . 


23.5 


6.84457 


311.75 .010770 


2.88 . 18065 


.0005527 



30 TO 40 PER CENT. 



26101 


33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
37.5 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 
33.3 


1.9790 
4.3698 
8. 3240 
6. 7169 
.5757 
5.03306 
7. 2545 
7. 3424 
2.0631 
8. 4456 
3. 7810 
7. 6051 
4. 1975 


122 
219 
386 
313 
28 
252 
365 
315 
167 
474 
244 
419 
253 


0.01704 
.01996 
.02311 
.02057 
. 01820 

.01814 

.moss 

.02117 
.01000 
.01796 
. 01550 
.01812 
.01611 


3.19 
3.07 
2.96 
2.21 
2.48 
3.25 
2.59 
3.08 
3.43 
2.14 
2.50 
2. 74 
3.93 


0. 06318 
. 13415 
. 25019 
.12186 
.01447 
.24284 
. 18789 
. 21633 
.07041 
. 18099 
. 09453 
. 20632 
. 18308 


0.0005091 
.0006126 
.0006842 
.0004466 
.0004 556 
.C006738 
.000.5118 
. 0006433 
. 0004496 
.0003842 
.0003874 
. 0004966 
.0006454 


28201 


28801 


33901 . . . 


37901 


38501... 


38701 


48301 . . . 


50901 


59601 

69701 


88901 


92301 


Average . . 


33.6 


5. 2065 


273.6 


.01813 


2.89 


. 15125 


.0005310 



40 TO 50 PER CENT. 



17501 


42.9 
44.4 
42.9 
42.9 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
40.0 
44.4 
42.9 
42.9 


1.1495 
4. 6950 
2. 9905 

1.8251 
.5320 
8.3672 
2.0970 
2. 64(52 
6.9409 
2.9064 
5. 3261 
4. 170.5 
5. 4034 
S.6610 


55 
259 

156 
93 
32 
321 
110 
167 
472 
156 
314 
238 
207 
4S4 


0.01865 
.01819 

.018.58 

.01963 
.01664 ■ 
.02946 

.01006 

. 01585 
.01456 
.01791 
.01622 
. 01894 
.01771 
.01769 


4.01 
3.01 
2.73 
2. 73 
3.17 
3.15 
3.01 
2.48 
3.40 
2.96 
2.50 
2.67 
3.32 
2. 27 


0. 04268 
.14144 

. 07.566 
.04008 

.01712 
.26913 
.06312 
. 06563 
.22024 
. 07905 
. 14008 
.11199 
. 16649 
.20040 


0. 00072.59 
.000o449 
. 0005066 
. 0005390 
. 00O5396 
. 0009502 
.0005738 
. 0003930 
. 0004700 
. 0005288 
.0004261 
. 0005053 
. 0005828 
. 0004046 


21301 . 


33101 

44601 

50701 


72401 


72801 


72901 


76201 


81401 


86101 . . . 


92201 . . . 


92501 


94401 


Average 


41.7 


4. 1223 


225. 3 


.01843 


2.96 


.11736 


.0005493 



YIELD AS AFFECTED BY SUSCEPTIBILITY TO COLD. 



103 



Table 29. — Yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family — Cont'd. 

50 TO 60 PER CENT. 



Record number 
for 1902. 


Percent- 
age of 
plants 
in 1903 

surviv- 
ing from 
[902. 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(gram). 


Num- 
ber of 
kernels. 


Weight 

of aver- 
age 

kernel 
(gram). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels 
(gram). 


Proteid 

nitrogen 
in a \ i " 
kernel 

(gram). 


17301 


50.0 
54.5 
50.0 
50.0 
50.0 
50.0 
57.1 
50.0 
50.0 
50. 
50.0 
50.0 
57.1 
50.0 
50.0 
50.0 
57.1 


3.0000 
11.7777 
6.6626 
12.9727 
5. 2333 
6.0463 
6.8220 
4. 1993 
1.9040 
2.3719 
4.8728 
6.0242 
9.3804 
4. 7193 
7. 227S 
4.2040 
5.6295 


156 
581 
327 

611 
271 
273 
328 
237 
89 
140 
273 
309 
435 
224 
334 
295 
266 


0. 01980 

.01961 
.02012 
.02105 
.01818 

.(12295 
.02019 
.01946 
.02284 
.01497 
.01832 
.OIS44 
.02178 
.01984 
.02186 
.91468 
.02236 


3.21 
2. 65 
2.85 
2.56 
L.98 
2.61 
2.86 
2.64 
2.97 
2.36 
2.69 
2.83 
2.37 
2.82 
3.74 
2.63 
2.57 


0.09556 
.30081 
.18906 
.31509 
. 19921 
. 14759 
.18949 
. 12164 
.05663 
.04852 
. 13084 
. 15608 
.18680 
. 12281 
.17078 
.11078 

. 14178 


0. 0006380 
.0005161 
.0005697 
.0005371 
0003569 
.9095729 
. 0005769 
.0005130 
.0006768 
.0003388 
.0004924 
.0005186 
.0005150 
.0005523 
.0008247 
.0003778 
.0005366 


17401 


20701 


27201 

33401 


33601 


34201 


37701 


39501 


45601 


46101 


55201 


57601 


63101 


85201 

88601 


Average 




51.5 


6.0616 


302.9 


.01974 


2.73 


. 15237 


.0005361 



60 TO 70 PER CENT. 



21201 


66.7 
60.0 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
66.7 
60.0 
66. 7 
66.7 
66.7 
60.0 
66. 7 
60.0 
66.7 
66.7 
60.0 
66.7 
62.5 
60.0 


2.5064 

5.8304 
2.9653 

11.6655 
6. 0446 
8. 6833 
5.4606 

10.4714 
5.0125 
7.7761 
7.6312 
8.1116 
4. 1723 
5.9586 
4.6412 
9. 3629 
7.7977 
8. 3679 
4. 1284 
4.6848 
5.4211 


137 
288 
166 
608 
341 
476 
280 
529 
319 
443 
383 
382 
229 
309 
265 
396 
'354 
451 
209 
258 
318 


0.01956 
.01937 
.01890 
.01919 
.91813 
.01824 
.01874 
.01914 
.01725 
.01752 
. 01973 
.02099 
.91791 
.91919 

.01758 
.02245 
.02194 
.01854 
. 01951 
.01763 
. 01672 


3.57 
2. 64 

2.62 
2.38 
3.06 
3.25 
2.27 
2.85 
2.71 
2.54 
2.49 
2.60 
2.17 
3.25 
4.04 
2.94 
2.59 
2.49 
2.87 
2.81 
2.58 


0.09431 
. 1 1603 
. 05309 
.27765 
. 18124 
. 25347 
. 12536 
.29155 
. 13688 
.20018 
. 19910 
.20327 
.06748 
. 17590 
. 14328 
.28276 
.21334 
.20681 
. 13763 
. 12877 
. 14079 


0.0006846 
. 0005027 
.0906177 
.0004567 
.0005437 
. 0005928 
.9904328 
.0005428 
.0004658 
.0004588 
.0004900 
.9905320 
.0003749 
.0005924 
.0007214 
.0006629 
.0005639 
.0004589 
.( II K 15622 
.0004908 
.0004336 


32201 


32601 


48101 


48501 


55001 


55301 


55501 


57001 


57391 


57401 


57501 


63501 


66001 


72601 


72701 


73301 


74601 


84901 


92901 


95701 


Average 


64.6 


6.5092 


340 


. 01896 


2.80 


. 17280 


.0005324 



70 PER CENT AND OVER. 



21701 

21801 

21901 


87.5 
80.0 
88.9 
87.5 
80.0 
71.4 
80.0 
71.4 
71.4 
83.3 
83.3 
83.3 
75.0 
83.3 
75.0 
83.3 
100.0 
100.0 
71.4 
83.3 
75.0 
100.0 


9. 75524 

11.5721 

8. 3406 

4.0677 

7. 1981 

3.8910 

6.6162 

6. 8618 

3.9532 

4. 4668 

10. 2785 

10.9242 

10.7383 

11.2241 

2.8084 

7. 5858 

3.4799 

12.7593 

4.4131 

5. 9603 

7.0172 

7.2959 


447 
622 
398 
229 
329 
209 
343 
310 
186 
277 
435 
489 
617 
563 
227 
394 
191 
569 
234 
339 
388 
374 


0.92157 
.01963 
.02114 
.01674 
.02045 
.01871 
.01913 
.02152 
.01983 
. 01502 
.02211 
. 92234 
.91744 
. 02034 
.01159 
.02001 
. 01695 
.02272 
.01822 
.01748 
.01780 
.01767 


2.78 
3.13 
3.53 
3.16 
2.82 
2.77 
2.93 
2.69 
3.72 
2.90 
2.55 
2.56 
2.75 
2.49 
2.88 
2.92 
2.78 
2.27 
2.63 
2.58 
2.85 
2.50 


0.30200 
. 35575 
. 30995 
.12604 
. 20306 
. 10870 
.18438 
. 17267 
.11558 
. 10033 
. 29008 
. 27788 
.29783 
.27997 
.08385 
.18248 
. 10355 
. 29500 
. 12426 
. 16548 
. 21294 
. 18689 


0.0006049 

. 0006057 
.0007501 
.0005292 
.0005768 
. 0005189 
. 0005447 
. 0005758 
. 0007264 
. 0004159 
. 0005589 
. 0005632 
.0004799 
.0005065 
0003383 
.9906050 
.1)0047-15 
.0005170 
.0004826 
.0004426 
.0005072 
.0004418 


22201 

26801 


26901 


27301 


27501 


38601 


48401 


55601 


55901 


56101 


56201 


58201 . . . 


65301 


74501 


81701 


92401 


94201 


94901 


95501 


Average 


82.4 


7. 3275 


371.2 


.01902 


2.83 


.20357 


.0005348 



104 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 30. — Summary of yields of plants, arranged according to percentage killed in each family. 



Percentage of plants 
grouped according 
to survivors of 1903 
from 1902. 


Num- 
ber of 
analy- 
ses. 


Percent- 
age of 
plants in 
1903 sur- 
viving 
from 1902. 


Weight 
of ker- 
nels on 
plant 
(grams). 


Num- 
ber of 


Weight 
of aver- 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen 
in ker- 
nels. 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


kernels 

per 
plant. 


age ker- 
nel 

(gram) 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


10 to 20 


30 
20 
13 
14 
17 
21 
22 


15.8 
23.5 
33. (i 
41.7 
51.5 
64.6 
82.4 


4. 7098 
6.844fi 
5.2065 
4.1223 
6.0616 
6. 5092 
7. 3275 


251 
312 
274 
225 
303 
340 
371 


0.01856 
.01978 
.01813 
.01843 
.01974 
.01896 
.01902 


2.91 
2.88 
2.89 
2-96 
2. 73 
2.80 
2. 83 


0. 12294 

. 18065 
.15125 


0. 0005437 


20 to 30 

30 to 10 


. 0005527 
.0005310 


in to 50 


.11736 .0005493 


."ill tn 60 


.15237 .0005361 


60 1" 7(1 


.17280 1 .0005324 




.20357 .0005348 









YIELD AND NITROGEN CONTENT OF GRAIN AS AFFECTED BY 
LENGTH OF GROWING PERIOD. 

Early-maturing varieties of wheat are, in general, better yielding 
sorts in Nebraska than are later maturing ones. There are some 
exceptions to this rule, however, Turkish Red } T ielding better than 
an} 7 " earlier maturing variety. The advantages from early maturity 
have usually been ascribed to the cooler weather and greater supply 
of moisture that obtain in the early summer. The hot, dry weather 
common in July is thought to prevent the filling out of the kernel and 
to cause light yield and light volume weight. 

Each wheat plant on the breeding plots was harvested separately 
in 1903, and a record was kept of the date of harvesting of each of 
these plants. These data have been tabulated for the purpose of 
showing the relation between the length of the growing season and 
the yield of grain from individual plants of the same variety. 

Table 31 contains these data, tabulated according to the date of 
ripening. Plants ripening between the 7th and 11th of July, 1903, 
form the first class, those ripening between July 11 and 15 the second 
class, and the succeeding classes increase by four days until July 27, all 
ripening after that date constituting the last class. The dates of 
ripening thus extend over a period of three weeks. 

The season of 1903 was a very wet and cool one. The effect of 
this upon the wheat crop is shown by the fact that the crop in the 
field w r as not read} r to harvest until July 10, while usually it is har- 
vested between the 20th and 30th of June. Even at the close of the 
ripening period the weather did not become dry or hot as compared 
with the normal season. It will therefore be seen that the ordinary 
advantages from early maturity did not obtain, or at least not in the 
customary way- It may also be said that some of the later maturing 
wheats yielded as well in 1904 as did the Turkish Red. 

Table 32 is a summary of Table 31, with a statement of the average 
for each class. 

Table 33 is a summary of the same plants, tabulated according to 
the yield of grain per plant. 



YIELD, ETC., AS AFFECTED BY GROWING PERIOD. 



105 



Table 34 is a summary of the same plants, tabulated according to 
the percentage of proteid nitrogen. 

It is very evident from these tables that the early-maturing plants 
are the most prolific. The weight of the average kernel remains very 
uniform, so that the later maturing plants do not appear to have pro- 
duced shrunken kernels. Evidently the plants ripening during the 
first four days produced the largest amounts of grain, and their ker- 
nels were as heavy as those produced later. The smaller productive- 
ness of the later maturing plants in the season of 1903 does not appear 
to have been due to a shrunken or light kernel. 

The percentage of proteid nitrogen appears to be somewhat less in 
the grain of the early-maturing plants. The number of grams of 
proteid nitrogen in the average kernel is likewise less in these early- 
maturing plants. 

The relation of length of growing season to both yield and compo- 
sition of grain is contrary to what might have been supposed. A 
long growing period without excessively hot or dry weather might 
naturally be thought to increase the yield and increase the percentage 
of carbohydrates in the grain. 

The season of 1904 was very similar to that of 1903 up to time of 
wheat harvest. The data for 1904, when tabulated, will serve as a 
check on the results obtained in 1903. 

Table 31 . — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing period. 
DATES RIPE: JULY 7 TO 11, 1903. 



Record number. 



Date 
ripe. 



21805 Julv ] 

21806 do. 

21807 do. 



21808... 
21809... 
21810... 
21811... 
21812... 
21813... 
55506 . . . 
55507... 
55605... 
55606 . . . 
55607... 
55608... 
55905... 



...do. 

...do. 

...do. 

...do. 
....do. 
....do. 

Julv 

....do. 

....do. 

....do. 

....do. 

....do. 

....do. 



55! 106 July 

55907 , Julv 

55908 '....do. 



Percent- 
Yield age of 
(grams), proteid 
nitrogen. 



55909 


July 9 
July 8 
July 7 
July 8 
....do.. . 


56106 

56107 

56206 


56207... 


56208 


....do... 


56209 . . 


...do.. . 


81505 


Julv 10 



81706. 
81707. 
81708. 
SI 709. 



Julv 
...do. 
...do. 
...do. 



20. 9290 
14. 2450 

9.4172 
19.7446 

8.0214 

1.0304 
11.9114 
14.8139 

4.0258 
17.8506 

9. 8228 
10.9180 
11.0930 

2. 3931 
22. 5848 

5. 7948 

7.9968 
19.3966 
12. 1221 

9.2120 
12.0161 
14.4556 

9. 3093 
10.9073 
13.5720 
15. 8086 

2. 8327 
15. 3928 
18.3614 

7. 3993 
16.4692 



2.69 
2.71 
2.73 
2.57 
2. 73 
2.69 
3.75 
4.26 
4.04 
2.80 
2.63 
2.64 
2.58 
2.69 
2.31 
2.67 
2.81 
2.59 
2.42 
2.30 
2.57 
2.96 
2.42 
2.34 
2.61 
2.59 
2.94 
2.71 
2.34 
2.41 
2.28 



Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 

(gram). 



0.01699 
.02378 
. 02498 
.01708 
.01919 
.019816 
. 021007 
.01507 
.01877 
. 02062 
.01949 
.02184 
.02205 
.01734 
.026! I! I 
.01751 
. 01603 
. 02590 
.02175 
.03050 
.01866 
. 01658 
.01829 
.02361 
. 02356 
.01661 
.01940 
.02132 
.02336 
.02578 
.02175 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 



Kernels. 



0.50299 
.38604 
. 25709 
.50744 
. 21898 
. 02772 
.44666 
.63107 
. 16377 
. 49995 
. 25834 
. 28823 
. 285S0 
.06437 
.52194 
. 15470 
. 22471 
. 50238 
.29575 
.21187 
.30881 
.42790 
.22529 
. 25522 
.34616 
. 10945 
.08328 
.41715 
.42965 
. 17833 
. 37548 



Average 
kernel. 



0. 0004569 
.0006441 
. 0006664 
. 0004389 
. 0005238 
. 0005330 
. 0007877 
. 0006420 
. 0007582 
. 0005773 
.0005126 
. 0005765 
.0005690 
. 0004665 
. 0006236 
. 0004674 
.0004503 
.OOOti707 
.0005262 
.0007016 
.0004 7! 15 
. 0004907 
. 0004426 
. 0005524 
.0006149 
.0004310 
. 0005704 
. 0005778 
. 0005466 
. 0006213 
.0004960 



106 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period—Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 7 TO 11, 1903— Continued. 



Record number. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


81710 


July 8 
July 10 

....do... 

....do... 


9.1411 

1.6362 

9.9456 

5. 1584 

L.5355 

9.8719 

12. 1918 

2. 3678 

3. 6977 

.3146 

11.0.548 

12. 1592 

14.4617 

2. 9475 

2. 8356 

10. 3426 

5. 1629 

.7577 


1.92 
2.80 
2.53 
2.61 
■>. 47 
2. 42 
2.94 
1.96 
3.60 
2.81 
2.74 
2.59 
2.56 
2.48 
1.81 
2.54 
2.73 
2.47 


0. 02308 
. 02731 
. 02068 
. 02205 
.02075 
.02100 
.01948 
.01894 
.01696 
.00850 
. 01852 
. 02029 
. 01954 
. 02136 
.01783 
. 01626 
. 01934 
.01457 


0. 17550 
. 04581 
.25162 
. 13463 
.03793 
.23890 
.35844 
.04641 
. 13312 
.00884 
.30291 
.31492 
. 37023 
. 07310 
. 05132 
. 26270 
. 14095 
. 01872 


0.0004432 
. 0007640 
.0005231 
.0005754 
.0005125 
. 00050S2 
. 0005726 
.0003713 
.0006106 
. 0002389 
. 0005074 
. 0005515 
.0005003 
. 0005297 
. 0003228 
.0004131 
. 0005279 
. 0003599 


88605 


88606 

88607 


88608 


...do... 


88609 


...do... 


94907 . . . 


...do... 


94908 


....do... 


94909 


July 9 
....do.. . 


95505 


95506 


...do.. . 


95507 


...do.. . 


95508 . . 


...do.. . 


95509 . . 


...do ... 


95510 


....do ... 


95705 


July 10 
....do ... 


95706 


95707 . . . 


...do ... 


Average . . . 




July 8. 9 


9. 9067 


2.69 


. 02024 


.26475 j .0005356 



DATES RIPE: JULY 11 TO 15, 1903. 



21905 


July 13 
....do... 


14.3111 
10. 4800 
2.9248 
3. 5574 
12. 1819 

8. 4593 
9.7236 

10. 1925 

2. 6965 
6.0173 

11.5675 
16.4120 
16.4061 
19. 1854 
3. 3266 
5. 5666 
13.3011 
3.0850 
4 5123 
12.0399 
10. 0005 

5. 51 24 
3.2964 

11.2890 
.3485 

6. 4302 

9. 4585 
L.6036 

11.2008 
9. 8346 
7.9684 

7. 1852 
2.5160 
4. 1323 

5. 6864 
9. 5078 
5. 7431 

6. 5232 
1.5364 

10. 1836 
3.3176 

3. 7263 

8. 5777 
7.9772 
4.7117 

9. 8378 
8328 

2. 4923 
14.9992 


2.64 
3.18 
3.35 
3.82 
4.43 
5.48 
2.31 
3.01 
2.81 
3.17 
3.17 
2.63 
2.41 
2.36 
2.92 
2.58 
3.47 
2.53 
4.15 
2.12 
2.70 
2.64 
4.87 
1.50 
2.81 
2.02 
3.20 
2.64 
2.76 
2.70 
3. 05 
3.16 
2.48 
2.18 
1.89 
2. 54 
2. 73 
2.51 
2.71 
2.76 
2.65 
2.76 
3. 19 
2.86 
2. 43 
1.69 
1.98 
2.75 
2.62 


0. 01809 
. 02563 
. 01851 
. 02056 
.02317 
. 02209 
. 01S07 
. 02072 
. 00953 
.02019 
. 02062 
. 01895 
.01841 
. 02469 
. 02004 
. 02085 
. 01945 
.01847 
.01777 
. 02183 
.(12252 
. 02287 
.01324 
.01572 
.01291 
. 02048 
.01701 
. 02296 
. 01858 
. 01798 
. 02028 
. 01593 
. 01507 
. 01931 
. 01663 
.02,95 
.01709 
. 01959 
.01746 
.01453 
.01975 
.00916 
. 01666 
. 01838 
. 01801 
. 01705 
. 02031 
.01846 
. 01968 


0. 37781 
. 33403 
. 09798 
. 13589 
. 53889 
. 46356 
. 22461 
.30680 
. 07577 
. 19075 
. 36671 
. 43164 
. 39539 
. 45276 
.09712 
. 14362 
. 32853 
.07805 
. 18726 
. 24942 
. 27003 
. 14608 
. 16053 
. 16933 
.00979 
. 12989 
. 30267 
. 04233 
.30986 
. 2655 : 
. 24303 
. 22705 
. 06240 
. 09008 
. 10747 
.24150 
. 15679 
. 16373 
. 04164 
. 28107 
. 08792 
. 10285 
. 29188 
.22815 
.11445 
. 16626 
.01649 
. 06854 
.39297 


0. 0004777 
.0008168 
.0006201 
. 0007855 
. 0010265 
. 0012103 
. 0004404 
. 0006235 
. 0002677 
. 0006401 
. 0006537 
. 0004984 
. 0004437 
. 0005827 
. 0005850 
. 0005379 
. 0004803 
. 0004674 
. 0007373 
. 0004627 
.00060S2 
. 0006037 
. 0006447 
. 0002358 
. 0003627 
.0004137 
. 0005444 
. 0006062 
.0005127 
. 0004877 
. 0006185 
. 0005034 
. 0003736 
.0004210 
.0003142 
. 0006225 
. 0004667 
.0004917 
. 0004731 
. 0004010 
. 0005233 
. 0002527 
. 0005826 
. 0005257 
. 0004387 
.0002SS1 
. 0004022 
. 0005077 
. 0005157 


21906... 


21907 


....do... 


21908 

21909 

21911 

21912 

21913 


....do... 

do... 

do... 
....do... 

do 


22205 

22210 

22211 

27005 

27205 

27206 

27207 


do... 

do... 

do... 
....do... 

do... 

do... 
....do... 


27305 

27306 

27307 


....do... 
....do... 
....do... 


27308 

27505 


....do... 
do 


27506 


...do.. . 


2750S 


....do... 


48406 


....do.. . 


48407 

48408 


....do... 
....do.. . 


48409 


...do.. . 


48506 


....do... 


48507 

4S508 


....do... 
....do... 


48806 

55005 


....do... 
...do... 


55006 . . . 


....do... 


55305 

55306 


....do... 
....do... 


55307 . . . 


....do... 


55308 


....do... 


56105 


...do... 


56205 . . . 


....do... 


57005... 


....do... 


57006 


....do... 


57007 

57105 


....do... 
....do... 


57305 


...do... 


57306 


....do... 


57307 

57308 


....do... 
....do.. . 


57405 


...do... 


57406 

57407 


....do... 
...do... 







YIELD, ETC., AS AFFECTED BY GROWING PERIOD. 



107 



Table 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period — Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 11 TO 15, 1903— Continued. 



Record number. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 

(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


57408 

57506..: 

57507 

57508 

57509 

57606 

.".7607 

57608 

58206 

58207 

65305 

65306 

65307 

65308 

94905 

94906 


July 13 

....do... 

....do... 

....do... 

....do... 

....do... 
'....do... 
l....do... 
'....do... 

....do... 

....do... 

....do... 

....do... 
'....do... 

July 11 

....do... 


12. 2004 
2. 7616 
6. 9861 

12.0728 

10. 6261 
3. 0790 

16. 4433 
8. 6189 
1. 3961 
4. 2207 
1. 8018 
9. 8298 
7. 0051 

11.7006 
4. 4423 

12. 3862 


2.61 
2.80 
2.85 
2.21 
2.54 
2.74 
1.73 
2. 64 
2.67 
3.09 
4.92 
2.41 
2.28 
2.09 
2.35 
3.41 


0. 02047 
. 01534 
. 01946 
. 03177 
.01739 
. 02333 
. 02234 
. 01968 
. 00943 
.01375 
. 02310 
. 01807 
.01878 
.02008 
.01553 
. 0180S 


0. 31842 
. 07733 
. 19905 
. 26680 
. 26990 
.08436 
. 24847 
. 22756 
. 03728 
. 13042 
. 08865 
. 23690 
. 15971 
. 24468 
. 10439 
. 42236 


0. 0005343 
. 0004296 
. 0005545 
. 0007021 
.0004417 
. 0006391 
.0003865 
. 0005195 
. 0002519 
. 0004248 
.0011365 
. 0004355 
.00042*2 
.0004197 
. 0003650 
. 0006166 


Average- . 


July 13 


7.6611 


2.81 


. 01S87 


.20N20 


. 0005290 



DATES RIPE: JULY 15 TO 19, 1903. 



1S906.. 
21706.. 
21707.. 
26105.. 
33406.. 
34206 . . 
34208.. 
37906.. 
45005.. 
45605.. 
48405.. 
48505.. 
51005.. 
63105.. 
63106.. 
66006.. 
72605.. 
72806.. 
74605.. 
81705.. 



91905.. 
91906 . . 
92205.. 
92206.. 
92207 . . 
92208.. 
92305.. 
92306.. 
92406.. 
92407 . . 
92408.. 
92409.. 
92506.. 
92507.. 
92905.. 
92906.. 
92907.. 
92908.. 
92909.. 
94105.. 
94205 . . 
94206.. 
94207.. 
94208.. 
94406.. 
94407 . . 
94605.. 
94606.. 



Average. . 



July 15 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

July 18 

...do... 

...do... 

July 15 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

July 18 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

July 16 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

...do... 

July 15 

Julv 16 

...do.. 

...do.. 

...do.. 

...do.. 

...do.. 

...do.. 

...do.. 



0. 9229 

19.3318 

12. 3685 

1.8242 

4. 6045 

1.5940 

2.9S86 

. 2062 

3. 2340 

.7081 

.9701 

1.9154 

15. 5835 

1 . 5452 

3. 3006 

I i. 0000 

1.1166 
2.0970 
7.1181 
9. 7922 
5.3069 
9. 9034 
3. 4436 
3. 5486 
5. 2616 
1.1074 
3. 6926 
6. 6206 
2. 3859 
6.0091 
8. 2366 
.8983 
3. 7820 
5.7131 
3. 8709 
9. 6779 
2. 7000 
2. 8816 
4.4673 
3. 2388 

10. 1363 

.5595 

1.2117 

7. 5006 

13. 7057 
3. 7828 

10. 5556 

6. 7664 

. 7319 

11.8435 



July 16.2 5. 1354 



3.48 
4.71 
2.19 
3.02 
2.87 
3.73 
2.13 
2.44 
3.58 
2.82 
3.31 
3.66 
1.34 
3.24 
2.79 
3. 54 
4.65 
3.01 
2.60 
1.98 
2.83 
2.65 
3.36 
2.81 
2.74 
2.67 
2.55 
2.72 
2.93 
4.93 
3.11 
1.66 
2.97 
2.30 
4.39 
2.58 
3.50 
2.99 
2.56 
2.32 
2.70 
2.67 
1.65 
2.78 
2.86 
3.10 
2.47 
2.07 
1.95 
1.80 



2.87 



0. 01420 
.02390 
.02125 
.01393 
.01627 
.01968 
.01916 
.01086 
.01376 
.01161 
. 01276 
. 01398 
. 01804 
.01717 
. 02001 
. 01642 
.01718 
.01906 
? 01784 
.02106 
.01811 
.01814 
.01739 
.01774 
.01525 
. 02407 
. 01767 
.01876 
.01491 
.01732 
.02168 
. 01695 
. 01827 
.01814 
.01690 
.01916 
. 01534 
. 01592 
.02040 
.01732 
.01916 
. 02543 
. 01893 
. 01866 
. 01909 
.01175 
. 01923 
.01615 
. 01307 
. 075 14 



.01869 



0.03212 
.91052 
.27086 
.05508 
. 13215 
.05946 
. 06366 
. 00503 
.11575 
.01997 
.03211 
. 07010 
. 20881 
. 05007 
.09208 
.21272 
.05192 
.06312 
. 18507 
. 19388 
. 15019 
. 26245 
.11570 
.09972 
. 14417 
. 02957 
.09416 
.18008 
.06991 
.29625 
. 25616 
.01491 
.11233 
. 1.3140 
. 16993 
.24969 

.00150 

.08616 

.11436 
.07514 
.27367 
.01494 
. 01999 
. 20851 
. 39199 
.11727 
. 26073 
. 14007 
.01427 
.21319 



. 14452 



0.0004941 
.0011283 

. 0004654 
. 0003662 
. 0004670 
.0007310 
. 0004081 
. 0002649 
. 0004927 
. 0003273 
. 0004225 
.0005117 
. 0002422 
. 0005563 
.0005581 
.0005812 

.00070NN 

.0005738 
. 0004638 
.0004170 
.0005126 
. 0004807 
. 0005844 
. 0004986 
.0004179 
. 0006428 
. 0004505 
. 0005102 
. 0004369 
. 0008539 
.0006741 
.0002814 
. 0005426 
.0004171 
. 0007421 
. 0004944 
. 0005369 
. 0004760 
. 0005220 
.0004018 
.0005173 
. 0006790 
. 0003124 
.0005187 
.0005460 
. 0003642 
.0004749 
. 0003343 
. 0002549 
.0013576 



.0005222 



108 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 31. — Yield ami nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

period — Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 19 TO 23, 1903. 



Record number. 

* 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grams). 


Percent- 
age of 
proteid 

nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels 


Average 

kernel. 


L7409 


July 21 


14.8957 


2.75 


0.01857 


0. 40964 


0.0005108 


L7505 


July 20 


.3885 


1.70 


.01340 


. 01826 


.0 .206 


18805 


July 21 


2. 1 162 


2.02 


.01567 


.04335 


.0003164 


20707 


....do... 


0.0070 


2.77 


.02282 


. 27443 


.0006181 


20708 


July 20 


2. 1600 


2.58 


.02024 


.06399 


.0005223 


21211 


July 21 


.2806 


3.15 


.02806 


.OONM 


. 0008839 


21306 


July 20 


1. 1516 


2.00 


.01837 


. 12039 


.0005327 


21308 


....do... 


5. 8080 


3.45 


.01641 


.20038 


.0005660 


2171(1 


July 21 


.8478 


2.59 


.01137 


.02196 


. 0003722 


21711 


....do... 


17. 1820 


2.71 


.01968 


. 46563 


. 0(K 15334 


22209 


....do... 


.4336 


3.84 


.01300 


.01665 


. 0005371 


26806 : 


July 20 


2. 7257. 


2.60 


.01793 


. 07086 


.0001662 


26807 


....do... 


17. 2324 


2.80 


. 02390 


. 48250 


. 0006692 


26808 


....do... 


3.8811 


3.09 


.01748 


. 11992 


.0005102 


26906 


July 22 


1.2: '.76 


2.71 


. 01859 


.11484 


.< 5037 


26907 


July 20 


1.8276 


2.61 


.01792 


.04995 


.0004677 


26909 


....do... 


2.0000 


2.80 


.01067 


.08400 


.0001667 


32606 


July 22 


2.0162 


2. 88 


.021 15 


. 05807 


.0006177 


33105 


July 21 


2. .".601 


2.91 


.01939 


.07150 


.0005644 


33905 


....do... 


11. 1476 


Mil 


.02104 


. 1 704S 


.0003533 


33906 


....do... 


2.2862 


2.81 


.10021 


.06424 


.0005399 


38606 


....do... 


8. 1605 


2.63 


.02110 


. 22251 


.0005510 


38607 


....do... 


.3037 


4.55 


. 01598 


. 01382 


. 0007273 


38608 


....do... 


3. 0228 


2.82 


.01913 


. 08522 


.0005394 


3S609 


....do... 


6. 7665 


2.71 


.02:110 


. 18540 


. 0006475 


38706 


July 20 


7.2545 


2.59 


.01988 


. 18789 


.0005148 


40405 


July 21 


.6316 


3.17 


.01373 


.02002 


. 0004:152 


12201! 


„..do... 


.3161 


1 . 16 


.01261 


. 00462 


.0001846 


14607 


July 20 


1.8246 


2. 1 1 


.01806 


.04452 


. 0004408 


18106 


July 21 


11.6655 


2.38 


.01919 


. 27765 


. 0004567 


18305 


July 20 


12. 0278 


2.S7 


. 02543 


. 34524 


.0007299 . 


18306 


....do... 


2.6571 


3.29 


.01692 


.08742 


. 0005568 


18706 


....do... 


6. 1989 


3.00 


.01635 


. 18596 


.0004906 


55007 


....do... 


2. 1571 


1.21 


.01828 


.090S2 


.0007696 


55008 


July 21 


17.4226 


2. 60 


.01846 


.45299 


.0004700 


55206 


....do... 


11.3592 


2. 56 


.01965 


.29079 


.0005031 


58805 


July 20 


23. 1471 


2.74 


. 01999 


. 63422 


.0005464 


59606 


....do... 


0. 70S) 


2. 16 


.01712 


.20070 


. 0003698 


63107 


....do... 


9.3120 


2.43 


. 02233 


.22628 


.0005121, 


63505 


July 21 


4.0230 


1.90 


. 01934 


.07644 


.0003674 


66008 


July 20 


3. 1555 


3.59 


.nisi | 


. 11328 


. 0006510 


ii9;i(). r > 


....do... 


2. 0430 


4.42 


.010NI 


.09030 


.OOOS707 


71905 


....do... 


28.2136 


2. 47 


.02239 


.69688 


.0005531 


72606 


....do... 


9.3629 


L.89 


.01724 


.18538 


.0003414 


72607 


....do... 


3. 4442 


5.59 


.01832 


.19253 


.0010241 


727o:> 


....do... 


9. 1522 


2. k; 


.02191 


. 1993(5 


.0004668 


72706 


....do.. . 


L4.6802 


3.86 


. 02484 


.56666 


. 000958s 


72707 


July 21 


4.5806 


3. 10 


. 02036 


. 15986 


.0007105 


72708 


July 20 


9.0386 


2.27 


. 02270 


.205 IN 


.0005154 


71507 


July 21 


0.2 Kid 


3.02 


.01869 


. 27823 


. 0005644 


76206 


July 20 


5.4411 


4.45 


.01217 


.2421:! 


.0005417 


84905 


....do... 


.7130 


2. 32 


.01927 


.01651 


.0004471 


NlOOt, 


....do... 


7. 5438 


3. 13 


.01075 


. 2587:-: 


. 0006773 


85206 


July 21 


4.0315 


2. 66 


.01. SI 2 


.13118 


. 0003332 


92405 


....do... 


3.4356 


3.10 


.01605 


. 10650 


. 0004977 


94209 

Average 


....do... 


3.6006 


2. 19 


.01X05 


.08965 


. 0004719 


July 20.1 


6. 5399 


2.93 


.01886 


. 18064 


.0005482 



DATES RIPE: JULY 23 To 27. L903. 



17305 


July 23 
....do... 


3.6302 
3.9968 

1 . 2275 
2.0907 
9. 2038 
16.9987 
1.8517 
3.3138 
17. 1115 
1 1.6942 


3.03 
3.09 

■A. 25 
3.29 
2. 18 
2.88 
3.09 
2.78 
2. 83 
3.32 


0.01984 
.01615 
.02012 
.01686 
.01852 
.02285 
.01698 
.02033 
.01074 
.02157 


0. 10999 
. 12350 
. 03904 
. 06878 
. 20065 
.48957 
. 05722 
.00212 
. 48428 
.48784 


0.0006010 
.0005082 
.000(540 
.0005547 
.0004037 
. 0006580 
.0005249 
. 0005652 
. 0005586 
.0000000 


i7:ioo. . . 


17308 


....do... 


17106... 


....do.. . 


17408 


....do... 


17110 


...do.. . 


20705 


do 


20706 


...do... 


20710. . 


...do.. . 


20805 


....do... 



YIELD, ETC., AS AFFECTED BY GROWING PERIOD. 



109 



Table 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

pt riod — Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 23 TO '-'7, 1903 -Continued. 




DATES RIPE: JULY 27, L903, OR LATER. 



17307 


July 27 


3.1454 


3. 46 


ii 02279 


o. 10883 


ii 0007886 


17-105 


....do... 


15.6996 


2. 13 


.02127 


.33441 


.0004531 


17506 


....do... 


2. 2881 


3.52 


.024611 


.0-044 


.0008660 


17507 


....do... 


.7720 


3. 80 


.01795 


. 02934 


.0006822 


18905 


....do... 


1 . 4864 


3.81 


(1144:: 


. 05663 


.oik 15498 


20709 


....do... 


5.3229 


3.05 


.02063 


. L6235 


.0006292 


21205 


....do... 


2. 3642 


3.16 


. 01922 


.07471 


.0006074 


21206 


....do... 


'.'. 8564 


5. 23 


.01917 


. 14939 


.0010026 


21207 


....do... 


2.3066 


2. 96 


.01955 


.06804 


. 0005766 


21208 


....do.. . 


5. 1594 


3.24 


.01798 


. 16712 


.0005824 


21209 


....do... 


1.4484 


3.61 


. 01627 


.0522s 


.IKK 15875 


21210 


....do... 


3.9143 


5.03 


. 01577 


. 19689 


.IKK 17934 


21212 


....do... 


1.7216 


2.16 


. 02049 


.03718 


. 0004427 


21305 


...do... 


6.2514 


2. 67 


. 020037 


. 1669! 


.0005350 


22207 


....do... 


3. 2787 


2 77 


. 01940 


.09082 


.0005374 


25205 


....do... 


10.7836 


2.71 


.02066 


.28560 


.0005599 


25206 


.....I..... 


4. 6754 


2. 76 


.02281 


. 12904 


.0006295 


26106 


....do... 


2. 0737 


2.63 


. 02304 


. 1 15454 


,IKK)6060 


26107 


....do... 


2.0390 


3.92 


.01416 


.07993 


. 0005551 


26805 


....do... 


4. 9456 


2.81 


02248 


. 13897 


.0006317 


28206 


....do... 


4. 3698 


3.07 


.019(16 


.13415 


.0006126 


32206 


....do... 


10.4036 


l.M 


.02052 


. 18831 


.0003714 


32207 


....do... 


1.2573 


■■',. 4s 


.01822 


. 04375 


.0006341 


32605 


....do... 


5. 2268 


1.20 


. 02323 


. 06272 


.0002788 



11C 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 31. — Yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of growing 

pt riod — Continued. 

DATES RIPE: JULY 27, 1903, OR LATER— Continued 



Record Dumber. 


Date 
ripe. 


Yield 
(grama). 


Percent- 
age (if 
proteid 

nitrogen. 


Weight 
of aver- 
age ker- 
nel 
(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 


32608 


July 27 


1.0183 


3. 78 


0.01851 


0.03849 


0. 0006998 


33305 


....do.. 


3. 1346 


3. 41 


.02090 


.10689 


.0007126 


33407 


....do.. 


7.0889 


1.62 


.02271 


. 1 1223 


.ooi 13679 


33408 


....do.. 


1. 1132 


1.39 


.01446 


. 01547 


.0002009 


33605 


....do.. 


7. 0596 


2.39 


. 02345 


. 16872 


.0005605 


33606 


....do... 


8. 1890 


2. 21 


.02144 


. 18098 


. 0004738 


33607 


....do... 


2. 8903 


3.22 


. 02125 


. 09307 


. 0006843 


34405 


....do.. 


4. 1281 


4. 33 


.01994 


. 17875 


. 0008635 


34606 


....do... 


6. 1962 


3.12 


. 02213 


. 19332 


. 0006904 


36905 


....do... 


5.0200 


3. 88 


. 01880 


. 19478 


. 0007295 


37305 


....do.. 


6. 1394 


2.96 


.01987 


. 18173 


. 0005881 


37705 


....do... 


8.0905 


2.64 


.01972 


. 23998 


. 0005327 


37706 


....do... 


1.2069 


2. 34 


.02155 


. 02824 


.0005053 


37707 


....do... 


3.3004 


2.93 


.01710 


. 09670 


.00(15010 


37905 


Aug. 4 


. 9452 


2. 53 


. 02555 


. 02391 


. 0006433 


38005 


July 27 


2. 5134 


2. 84 


. 01808 


. 07138 


. 0005135 


38505 


....do... 


12. 1088 


3.61 


. 02252 


. 43713 


.(UK 17764 


39205 


....do... 


21. 5399 


2.11 


. 02089 


. 45435 


. 0004407 


39405 


....do... 


9. 3541 


2. 88 


. 02093 


. 21399 


. 0006027 


39506 


Aug. 4 


1.9218 


2. 93 


. 02869 


. 05631 


.0008404 


39507 


July 27 


1.8862 


3.02 


. 01699 


. 05696 


.0005132 


39606 


....do... 


1.6383 


2. 37 


. 01341 


. 10967 


.0003177 


40505 


....do... 


4. 1546 


2.82 


. 02444 


.11716 


.OIK 16892 


42205 


....do... 


1.8494 


3. 63 


. 01967 


.06713 


.0007142 


42405 


....do... 


1.4892 


3.07 


. 02251 


.04572 


. 0006927 


43405 


....do... 


2.8000 


2.92 


. 02258 


. 0S176 


. 0006594 


43505 


Aug. 4 


1.4464 


4.13 


. 01555 


. 05974 


. 0006423 


44605 


July 27 


1. 1271 


2.86 


. 02049 


.0322^ 


.0005861 


46105 


....do.. . 


4.6146 


3.00 


. 01775 


. 13843 


. 0005324 


46106 


do. . . 


1.6103 


2.54 


. 01964 


.04090 


. 0004988 


48705 


....do... 


4.3615 


3. 13 


. 01652 


. 13652 


.0005171 


49505 


....do... 


1.2716 


3. 24 


. 01898 


.04120 


.0006149 


49905 


....do... 


.6760 


3.62 


. 02939 


. 02436 


.0010640 


50906 


....do... 


1. 7280 


3.57 


.01516 


. 06169 


.0005111 


55508 


....do... 


3. 7407 


3.11 


.01732 


.11636 


. 0005386 


58806 


....do... 


1.9469 


1 . 88 


. 02049 


. 03660 


. 0003853 


58905 


....do... 


2. 3031 


2. 43 


.01355 


. 05596 


.0003292 


59605 


....do... 


7. 1828 


2. 12 


.01880 


. 15228 


.0003986 


63500 


....do... 


2. 3986 


2.44 


.01568 


. 05853 


. 0003825 


66005 


....do... 


7. 6690 


2. 63 


. 02073 


.20170 


. 0005451 


69506 


....do... 


13.5696 


2. 50 


. 02047 


. 3.3923 


.0005117 


69805 


....do... 


2. 4420 


5. 82 


. 02220 


.14213 


.0012921 


69806 


....do... 


12. 0136 


1.66 


. 02153 


. 19943 


. 0003574 


72405 


....do... 


8. 4415 


3. 36 


. 03963 


.28363 


.0013316 


72406 


....do... 


8.2929 


2. 95 


. 01929 


. 24464 


. 0005689 


72905 


....do... 


2. 6462 


2.48 


.01585 


. 06563 


. 0003930 


73307 


....do... 


.5572 


2. 39 


. 02229 


. 01332 


. 0005327 


73308 


....do... 


14.2986 


2.! 12 


. 02291 


.41752 


.0006539 


74305 


....do... 


4. 4222 


1.98 


. 02047 


. 08756 


.11004054 


74506 


....do... 


.41196 


2.73 


.01781 


.01118 


. 0004862 


74508 


....do... 


.8172 


2.60 


.01434 


.02125 


. 0003728 


76205 


....do... 


8. 4407 


2. 35 


. 01695 


. 19836 


.0003982 


80305 


....do... 


15.7835 


1.81 


.02165 


. 28569 


.0003919 


81405 


....do... 


4. 5737 


2.62 


.01862 


.11710 


. 0004879 


81406 


....do... 


1.2391 


3.31 


.01721 


.04101 


.OIK 15697 


84405 


....do... 


8. 7448 


2.48 


. 02043 


. 21687 


.0005067 


85205 


....do... 


3. 4766, 


2.60 


. 01625 


. 09039 


.0004224 


86105 


....do... 


3. 0282 


2.56 


.01495 


. 07964 


.0003923 


86106 

Average.. 


....do... 


7.6241 


2.63 


.01749 


.20052 


.IKK 14599 


July 27.2 


4. 6636 


2.94 


. 01992 


. 12854 


. 0005800 



RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



Ill 



Table 32.— Summary of yield and nitrogen content of grain, tabulated according to length of 

growing period. 



Plants grouped according to 


Num- 
ber of 

anal- 
yses. 


Average 

date ripe. 


Yield 


Percent- 
age of 


Weight 

of aver- 
age 
kernel 

(gram). 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 


date ripe. 


(grams). 


proteid 
nitrogen. 


Kernels. 


A verage 

kernel. 


July 7 to 11 


49 
65 
50 
56 
52 
83 


July 8. 9... 
July 13.... 
July 16.2.. 
July 20. 1.. 
July 23. 2.. 
July 27. 2.. 


9.9067 
7.6611 
5. 1354 
6.5399 
4.9015 
4. 6636 


2.69 
2.81 

2.87 
2.93 
2.93 
2.94 


0.02024 

.01887 
.01869 
.01886 

.01878 
. 01992 


0.26475 
.20820 
.14152 
. 18064 
. 13654 
. 12854 


0005356 


July 11 to 1.5. .. . 


0005290 


July 15 to 19 


000522 ' 


July 19 to 23 


.0005482 


July 23 to 27 


.0005544 




. 0005800 











Table 33. — Summary of nitrogen content, etc., tabulated according to yield per plant. 



Plants grouped according to 


Num- 
ber of 


Average 
date ripe. 


Yield 

(grams). 


Percent- height 
age of °7J er 
proteid ,.^ e „, 

nitrogen. ( ™ 


Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in — 


yield. (in grams). 


anal- 
yses. 


Kernels. 


Average 
kernel. 




31 

67 
88 
94 
52 
20 
4 


July 20. 2.. 
July21.9.. 
July 20.... 
July 18.3.. 
July 15. I.. 
July 15.1.. 
July 14.5. . 


0. 6049 
1.7673 

3.5683 
7.6706 
12. 2573 
17.1908 
23. 7186 


2.91 0.01683 
3.09 .01852 
3.03 .01796 
2.68 .01997 
2.71 .02168 

2.54 .02103 

2. 55 . 02159 


0.01731 
.05456 
. 10794 
. 20270 
. 33433 
.43921 
. 60401 


0004916 


1 to 2 5 


. 0005730 


2.5 to 5 




5 to 10 


(10(1535] 


10 to 15 


. 0005774 


15 to 20 


. 0005382 


More than 20 


.0005450 




s 







Table 34. — Summary of yield, etc., tabulated according to nitrogen content. 



Plants grouped according to 
percentage of nitrogen. 



Below 1.5... 
1.5 to 2 

2 to 2.25 

2.25 to 2.5... 
2.5 to 2.75... 
2.75 to 3 

3 to 3.25 

3.25 to 3.5... 

3.5 to 4 

More than 4 



Num- 
ber of 
anal- 
yses. 



Average 
date ripe. 



Yield 

(grams). 



July 
July 
July 
July- 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 
July 



22.5. 
18.5. 
19.8. 
17.3. 
16.3. 
19.6. 
21.2. 
20.7. 
21.5. 
19.5. 



| Percent- 
| age of 
proteid 
nitrogen. 



5. Ml'. I! I 
2. 7423 
8.9542 
7. 3389 
8.0817 
5. 9093 
4.4407 
4.6756 
3.6486 
4.5431 



1.35 
1.80 
2.12 
2.39 
2.63 
2.85 
3.11 
3.37 
3.68 
4.72 



Weight 
of aver- 
age 
kernel 
(gram). 



0.01709 
.02124 
.02030 
.02(100 
.01938 
.01910 
.01824 
.01870 
.01852 
.01819 



Proteid nitrogen 
(gram) in— 



Kernels. 



0.07290 
.11620 
. 19070 
.18478 
.21280 
. 16609 
. 13847 
. 15189 
. 13513 
.21239 



Average 

kernel. 



0. 0002266 
.0003S67 
.0004325 
.0004773 
.0005102 
. 0005454 
. 0005667 
.0006213 
.1101 W'.NI 17 

.0008639 



RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, HEIGHT, AND 
TILLERING OF PLANT. 

The size of the head has alwa}^s been considered to be closely con- 
nected with the productiveness of wheat. The well-known work of 
Hallet in increasing the yielding qualities of wheat is perhaps the 
best example of wheat improvement by the selection of plants having 
large heads. Whether large heads or a large number of medium- 
sized heads on a plant are more desirable is still a question. 

Table 35 gives the yields, etc., of between 300 and 400 plants, tab- 
ulated according to the number of kernels on the head. Table 36 
is a summary of these, while Tables 37 and 38 consist of the same 
data tabulated according to the yield per plant and yield per head, 
respectively. 



112 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



It will be seen from Table 36 that the heads of slightly more than 
medium size produced the largest yields of grain; that the weight of 
the average kernel did not increase with the size of the head, nor did 
it decrease except on the very largest heads; that the plants with 
somewhat more than average-sized heads were the tallest, and that 
the plants with medium-sized heads or slightly less tillered most 
largely. 

Table 37 shows that with an increased yield per plant there is a 
constant increase in the height and tillering of the plant. 

Table 38 indicates that the yield per head and yield per plant do 
not increase together, but that the largest yielding plants are those of 
medium yield per head. The same would seem to be true of the 
height and tillering of the plant. The weight of the average kernel 
increases quite uniformly with the yield per head. 

In considering these results it must be borne in mind that these 
plants were grown 6 inches apart each way, and were therefore not 
under the conditions that would obtain in a thickly drilled or broad- 
casted field, where lack of ability to tiller would be compensated for 
by the larger number of plants. However, the variety of wheat 
yielding best in Nebraska is one having only a medium-sized or 
even small head, as compared with most wheats, but it is a strong- 
tillering variety. 

Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant. 
SIZE OF HEAD, BELOW 16 KERNELS. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Size of 
head. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 

head 
(grams). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 

(grams). 


Height 
(cm). 


Tillering. 


17308 


15.2 


1.2275 


0.3069 


0.02012 


59 


5 


17406 


15.5 


2.0907 


.2613 


.01686 


65 


11 


18805 


15.2 


2. 1462 


.2385 


.01567 


65 


18 


20708 


13.6 


2. 4690 


.2743 


. 02024 


60 


11 


21211 


10.0 


. 2806 


.I'M II i 


. 02806 


45 


2 


22209 


15.5 


. 4336 


.2168 


.01399 


70 


6 


26805 


15.7 


4.9456 


.3533 


.02248 


68 


26 


32207 


13.8 


1 . 2573 


.2515 


.01822 


47 


5 




12.3 


.9452 


.3151 


. 02555 


52 


3 


39506 


11.2 


1.9218 


.3203 


. 02869 


48 


6 


42206 


12.5 


.3161 


.1580 


.01264 


63 


5 


44(107 


12.6 


2. 5235 


.2281 


.02035 


■52 


12 


48408 


13.5 


.3485 


.1742 


.01291 


45 


3 


49905 


11.5 


.11760 


.3380 


.02939 


49 


2 


50705 


15.0 


.5958 


. 2979 


.01986 


40 


3 


7331)7 


12.5 


.5572 


. 2786 


.02229 


46 


4 


7451)1; 


12.5 


.4096 


.2048 


.01781 


68 


2 


94105 


11.0 


. 5595 


.2797 


.02543 


51 


1 


Average . . 


13.3 


1.3169 


.2654 


. 02059 


55.2 


6.9 





SIZE 


OF HEAD, 16 TO 20 


KERNELS 






17410 


19.1 


16. 9987 


0.435S 


0. 02285 


84 


46 


21205 


17.6 


2. 3642 


.3378 


.01922 


55 


10 


21305 


16.4 


6.2514 


.32110 


. 02004 


65 


21 


21307 


17.9 


2.5691 


.3211 


.01796 


53 


10 


21705 


19.3 


1.5420 


.5140 


.02659 


73 


3 


21710 


19.7 


.8478 


.2826 


.01437 


59 


5 



RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 113 

Table 35. — Relation of size of head to.yield, height, and tittering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 16 TO 20 KERNELS Continued 



Record num- 
ber. 


Size of Yl ' e ' d P er 

head. , P lant 

(grams). 


Yield per 
head 

(grams). 


Weight of 
average Height 

kernel (cm.), 
(grams). 


Tillering. 


21807 

22207 

22208 

26906 

26909 


18.8 
18.8 
16.8 
19.0 
18.0 
19.9 
18.0 
18.7 
19.0 
19.8 
19.0 
17.6 
19. 5 
L8.8 
18.3 
17.7 
19.0 
17.5 
18.4 
19.2 
17.7 
17.7 
16.3 
17.1 
19.0 
19.1 
18.5 
19.0 
17.3 
19.9 


9.4172 

3. 2787 
1.9090 
1.2376 
2.9999 
4.3698 

.3089 
1.2069 

.2063 
2.5134 

.3037 
3. 0228 
ti. 7665 
1.8494 
1. 1271 
2.5235 

.9701 

. 4701 
5. 7948 
7.9968 
5. 7431 
10.9073 
4.7117 
3.7810 

.8172 
7.3993 
1.5355 
3.6926 
2.6615 
2. 8356 


0. 1700 
. 3643 
. 2727 
. 3531 
.3000 
. 3972 
.3089 
.4023 
.2063 
.3591 
. 3037 
.3359 
.4511 

. 1000 

.3757 
. 3605 
. 2425 
.2350 
.3219 
.3076 
. 3023 
.4195 
. 2945 
.2701 
.2724 
.4933 
.3839 
. 3357 
.2957 
.3544 


0. 02498 

.01010 
.01010 
.01, S.V.I 
.01007 
.01996 

.01710 
.02155 

86 

.01808 
.01598 
.01013 
.02300 
.01007 
. 02049 
. 02035 
.01270 
.013 13 
.01751 
.01603 
.01709 
.02301 

.01801 

.01550 
.01434 
.02578 
. 02075 
. 01 767 
.01706 
. 01783 


77 
65 
57 
70 
50 
80 
43 
12 
50 
53 
56 
60 
65 
68 
53 
52 
55 
38 
75 
85 
70 
S4 
67 
88 
50 
86 
69 
73 
68 
70 


25 

16 

8 

16 

10 

26 

2 

4 

2 

7 

2 

11 

6 

6 

3 

8 

5 

2 

34 

40 

35 

42 

17 

28 

4 

20 

4 

15 

12 

8 


28206 

33106 

37706 

37906 

38005 

38607 

38608 

38609 

42205 

44605 

44606 

48405 

507(16 

55905 

55906 

56105 

56-117 

57307 

69705 

74508 

81708 

88608 

92207 

92505 

95510 


Average . . 


18.4 


3. 7758 


.3383 


. 01862 


64.1 


13.7 



SIZE OF HEAD, 20 TO 24 KERNELS. 



17305. 
17408. 
17507. 
20705. 
20706. 
20707. 
20709. 
21207. 
21212. 
21306. 
21707. 
21708. 
21809. 
21811. 
21812. 
21907. 
22205. 
26106. 
20806. 
26807. 
27207. 
27307. 
27505. 



33105. 
33405. 
33407 . 

33906 . 
38606 . 
38706 . 
40405. 
43505: 
45605. 
4.5705. 
48106 . 
48305. 
48406 . 
48507. 



22.9 
23. 7 
21.5 
21.8 
23. 3 
21.1 
23.5 
23. 6 
21.0 
22.0 
23.3 
20.5 
20.9 
21.0 
22.9 
22.6 
23.6 
22.5 
21.7 
21.8 
20. 7 
23.8 
21.6 
21.7 
22.0 
23. 4 
21.8 
23.8 
22.3 
21.5 
23.0 
23.2 
20.3 
22.0 
21.0 
23.6 
22.6 
23.3 



:;. n;;o2 
9.2038 
.7720 
1.8517 
3.3138 
9. 9070 
5.3229 
2. 3066 
1.7216 
4.1516 

12.3685 
9.2850 
8.0214 

11.9114 

14.8139 
2.9248 
2. 6965 
2.0737 
2. 7255 

17.2324 
3.3266 
3. 0850 

12. 0399 

2. 1851 

2. 5601 

8. 1268 

7.0889 

2. 2862 

8. 4605 

7. 2545 

.6316 

1.4464 

.7081 

. 7532 

11.6655 

12.0278 
3.2964 
1.6036 



0. 4538 
.4383 
.3860 
.3703 
. 4734 
.4718 
.4839 
.4613 
.4304 
.4152 
.4947 
.4887 
.4011 
.4412 
.3445 
.4178 
.2247 
. 5184 
. 3S94 
.5222 
.4158 
. 4407 
.4815 
.5463 
.4267 
.4515 
.5063 
.4572 
.4700 
.4267 
.3158 
.3616 
. 2360 
.3766 
.4023 
.6014 
.2997 
.5345 



0. 01984 
. 01852 
.01795 
.01698 
.02033 
.02282 
.02063 
.01055 
. 02049 
.01837 
.02125 
.02381 

.01010 

.02101 

.01507 
.01851 
.00953 
. 02304 
.01793 
. 02390 
. 02004 
.01847 
.02183 

.02512 
.01030 
.01030 
.02271 
.01921 
.02110 
. 01988 
.01373 
.01555 
.01161 
.01712 
.10010 
.02513 
.01324 
.02296 



61 

73 

78 

55 

61 

75 

07 

60 

50 

60 

90- 

85 

M 
87 
90 
82 
80 
60 
56 
70 
75 
80 
M 
65 
65 
68 
67 
07 
71 
75 
54 
45 
55 
58 
79 
81 

OS 

63 



12 
40 
9 
10 
38 
6 

12 

20 

18 

9 

24 

30 

3 

3 

6 

6 

39 

28 

13 

7 



27889— No. 78—05- 



114 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, lieicjht, and tillering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 20 TO 24 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Size of 
head. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 

head 
(grams). 


Weight of 

average 

kernel 

(grams). 


Height 
(cm.). 


Tillering. 


48806 


21.0 


9. 8346 


0.3782 


0.01798 


78 


12 


55205 


20.0 


. 6893 


.3446 


.01723 


56 


6 


5560(i 


22.9 


11.0930 


. 5042 


.1122(1.". 


92 


24 


55907 


21.4 


19. 3966 


. 55 12 


. 02590 


95 


42 


55908 


23.4 


12. 2210 


.5092 


.02175 


95 


40 


55909 


21.5 


9.2120 


.6580 


. 03050 • 


85 


31 


56205 


23.8 


6. 5232 


.4659 


.01959 


82 


29 


56206 


20.4 
22. 5 


9. 3093 
13. 5720 


. 3724 
..1129 


.01829 
.02356 


86 
88 


42 
51 


56208 


56209 


21.1 


15. 8086 


.3513 


.01664 


90 


67 


57005 


22.0 


1.5364 


.3841 


.01746 


73 


7 


57105 


23.9 


3. 7263 


.2192 


.00916 


85 


40 


57305 


22. 8 


8. 5777 


. 3899 


.01666 


78 


30 


57300 


21.7 


7.9772 


.3989 


.01S3S 


80 


23 


57308 


21.4 


9.8378 


.3644 


.(1170.". 


SO 


40 


5750:1 


22.5 


2.7616 


.3452 


.01534 


72 


18 


57507 


23.9 


0.9*01 


. 1657 


.01946 


78 


26 


57508 


22.3 


12.072S 


.7102 


.03177 


85 


22 


63105 


22.5 


1.5452 


.3883 


.01717 


68 


8 


63106 


23.6 


3. 3006 


.4715 


.02001 


77 


9 


63107 


21.9 


9.3120 


.4901 


.02233 


SO 


25 


72605 


21.7 


1. 1166 


. 3722 


.01718 


52 


3 


72705 


21.9 


9. 1522 


. 5384 


.02191 


68 


20 


74305 


21.6 


4.4222 


. 4422 


.02017 


60 


11 


74507 


20.5 


9.2130 


.3839 


.01869 


70 


27 


74605 


21.0 


7. 1181 


.3746 


.017S4 


69 


27 


74606 


23.2 


9.6451 


. 4822 


.02079 


10 


24 


76205 


21.7 


8. 4407 


.3670 


.01695 


70 


26 


81405 


21.8 


4.5737 


.4158 


.01862 


70 


11 


81705 


21.1 


9. 7922 


.4451 


.02101. 


82 


27 


81706 


21.2 


15.3928 


.4527 


.02132 


90 


40 


81707 


23.8 


L8.3614 


. 5564 


. 02336 


96 


53 


81709 


20.5 


16. 4692 


. 4451 


.02175 


90 


45 


84405 


23.8 


8. 7448 


.4858 


. 02043 


75 


19 


88607 


23.4 


5. 1584 


.5158 


.02205 


73 


15 




22. 


3. 4436 


.3826 


.01739 


72 


12 


91906 


22. 2 


3.5486 


.3943 


.01774 


74 


11 


92206 


23.0 


1.1074 


. 5537 


.02407 


66 


3 


92305 


22.9 


2.3859 


.3408 


.01491 


65 


11 


92306 


23. 1 


6.0091 


.4006 


.01732 


75 


19 


92506 


22.9 


3. 8709 


.3871 


.01690 


77 


16 


92507 

Average. 


22.0 


9.6779 


. 4208 


.01916 


82 


29 


22.2 


6.8466 


. 4355 


. 01953 


73.8 


21.4 



SIZE OF HEAD, 24 TO 28 KERNELS. 



17306 


. J 24. 3 


3. 9968 


0.3997 


0.01645 


66 


12 


1740.5 


25. 1 


15.1996 


.5414 


.02127 


72 


34 


17409 


24.3 


L4.8957 

17.1115 


.4514 
. 5032 


.01857 

.01974 


So 
77 


39 
39 


20710 


25. 5 


21206 


24. 8 


2. 8564 


.17(11 


.01917 


62 


6 


21308 


25. 3 


5. 8080 


.4149 


.01641 


54 


14 


21706 


26.9 


19.3318 


.(1444 


. 02390 


88 


38 


21709 


25.8 


7. 7296 


.5521 


.021 11 


85 


23 


21711 


24.2 


17. 1S20 


. 4773 


.01968 


85 


51 


21806 


24.9 


14.2450 


.5935 


.02378 


91 


32 


21808 


2.".. 7 


19.7446 


.4388 


.01708 


96 


57 


21810 


26.0 


1.0304 


.5152 


.01982 


55 


4 


21913 


27.3 


10. 1925 


.5662 


. 02072 


84 


27 


22210 


27. 1 


6.0173 


. 5470 


.02019 


78 


31 


26808 


24.7 


3.8811 


.4312 


.01748 


64 


11 


2.905 


25.1 


6. 1102 


.4931 


.01966 


66 


15 


26908 


24. 


3.9797 


.1971 


.02073 


62 


9 






in. loni 


.4825 


.01841 


87 


57 


27305 


24.3 


5.5666 


.5061 


.02085 


80 


22 


27506 


24.7 


10.0005 


.5556 


.02252 


85 


23 


27507 


25. 


1.37 If. 


. 4582 


.01833 


50 


4 


27508 


27.9 


5.5324 


.6137 


. 02287 


78 


19 


321 OS 


27.5 


1.0183 


.5091 


.01851 


50 


2 


33107 


24.5 


(i. 1026 


. 1694 


.01919 


73 


29 


33305 


25.0 


3. 1346 


. 5224 


.02090 


53 


7 


33406 


25. 7 


4. 6045 


.4186 


.OK.27 


72 


16 


33408 


25. 7 


1.1132 


.3711 


.01446 


56 


4 



RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



115 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tittering of plant — Continued. 

SIZE OF HEAD, 24 TO 28 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Size of 
head. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 
head 

(grams). 


Weight of 

average 

kernel 

(grams). 


Height 
(em.). 


Tillering. 


33605 


27.4 


7.0596 


0. 6418 


0. 02345 


65 


14 


33606 


27.3 


S. IX Ml 


.5489 


.02144 


72 


17 


33607 


27.2 


2.8903 


.5781 


.02125 


58 


6 


33905 


26.7 


11.1476 


. 5867 


. 02194 


1 1 


23 


34207 


26. 6 


13. .m.-,6 


.5894 


. 02219 


1 1 


22 


37705 


25.6 


8.0905 


.4495 


.01972 


60 


22 


39507 


27.8 


L.8862 


.4715 


.011.99 


59 


4 


45606 


24.4 


4.0358 


. 4484 


.01834 


59 


13 


48306 


26.2 


2.6571 


.4428 


.01692 


58 


7 


48407 


26.6 


11.2890 


.4181 


.01572 


82 


53 


48409 


26.2 


6.4302 


. 5358 


.02048 


74 


19 


48505 


27.4 


1.9154 


.3831 


.01398 


70 


/ 


4850S 


27.4 


1 1 . 200S 


.5091 


.01858 


80 


36 


55506 


27.1 


17.S506 


. 5578 


. 02062 


95 


58 


56107 


24.9 


11. 1556 


. 3023 


.01658 


90 


49 


57509 


27.8 


10.6261 


. 1830 


.01739 


84 


37 


57606 


26.4 


3.0790 


.6158 


. 02333 


78 


8 


57607 


27.3 


16. 1433 


.6090 


. 02234 


87 


48 


57608 


24.3 


8. 6189 


.4788 


.01968 


83 


38 


58206 


24.7 


1.3961 


. 2327 


. 00943 


75 


29 


63506 


25. 5 


2. 3986 


.-.VMS 


.01568 


64 


7 


65305 


26.0 


1.8018 


.Minn 


.02310 


65 


10 


65306 


25. 9 


9.8298 


.4681 


.01807 


75 


28 


65308 


26.5 


11.7066 


.5321 


.0200S 


77 


35 


66008 


24.9 


3. 1555 


. 4505 


.01814 


76 


8 


69505 


25. .". 


4.7116 


.4712 


.01847 


66 


13 


69805 


27.5 


2.4420 


.6105 


. 02220 


62 


7 


69806 


27.9 


12.0136 


.6007 


.02153 


75 


28 


72606 


27.1 


9.3629 


. 1681 


. 01724 


82 


26 


72607 


26.9 


::. 1442 


. 4920 


. 01S32 


74 


8 


72905 


27.8 


2.641,2 


.4410 


. 01585 


59 


5 


74607 


25.8 


8.3406 


. 1390 


.01699 


76 


31 


80305 


25.1 


15.7835 


.5442 


.02165 


70 


33 


81406 


24.0 


1.2391 


.4130 


.01721 


55 


3 


81710 


24.7 


9.1411 


.5713 


. 02308 


90 


24 


84906 


25.5 


7.5438 


. 5029 


.01975 


65 


16 


85205 


26.7 


:■!. 1766 


.4386 


.01625 


65 


11 


86105 


25.4 


3.0282 


.3785 


.01495 


68 


4 


86106 


27.2 


7.6241 


.4765 


.01749 


76 


25 


88606 


25.3 


9.9456 


.5234 


.02068 


85 


23 


88609 


24.7 


9.8719 


. 5196 


.02100 


71 


26 


88905 


26.6 


5. 3069 


.4824 


.01811 


82 


17 


92205 


26.5 


5.2616 


.4047 


.01525 


72 


18 


92405 


26. 7 


3.4356 


.4294 


.01605 


78 


10 


92407 


26.5 


. 8983 


.4491 


.01695 


68 


2 


92907 


24.3 


4.4673 


.4964 


.02040 


84 


10 


94206 


25.1 


7.5006 


.4688 


.01866 


76 


19 


94208 


24.8 


3.7828 


.2909 


.01175 


71 


19 


91407 


26.2 


6. 7664 


.4229 


.01615 


82 


23 


94907 


27.2 


12. 1918 


.5301 


.01948 


85 


23 


94908 


25.0 


2.3678 


.4736 


.01894 


73 


9 


94909 


24.2 


3. 6977 


.2631 


.01696 


72 


9 


95506 


25.9 


11.0548 


.4806 


.01852 


86 


25 


95507 


26.0 


12. 1592 


. 5527 


.02029 


90 


22- 


95508 


25.5 


14.4(117 


.4987 


.01954 


97 


31 


95705 


26.5 


10. 3426 


.4309 


.01626 


80 


31 


95707 

Average . 


26.0 


./.hi 


.3788 


.01457 


67 


4 


25.9 


7. 5207 


.4848 


. 01S74 


73.8 


21.2 



SIZE OF HEAD, 28 TO 32 KERNELS. 



17505 


29.0 


0.3885 


0.3885 


0.01340 ■ 


46 


7 


17506 


31.0 


2. 2881 


.7627 


.02460 


55 


6 


20805 


31.7 


14.6942 


.6679 


.02157 


85 


30 


21208 


28.7 


5. 1594 


.5159 


.01798 


63 


11 


21209 


29.7 


1. HM 


.4828 


.01627 


51 


6 


21210 


29.6 


3.9143 


.4893 


.01577 


59 


8 


21805 


29.3 


20. 9290 


.4983 


. 01699 


91 


48 


21905 


28.2 


14.3111 


.5111 


.01809 


92 


62 


21906 


31.4 


10. 4800 


.8062 


. 02563 


88 


27 


21908 


28.8 


3. 5574 


. 5929 


.02056 


92 


9 


21909 


30.9 


12.1819 


.7166 


.02317 


86 


29 


21911 


29.5 


8.4593 


.6597 


.02209 


90 


23 



116 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 35. — Relation of she of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 28 TO 32 KERNELS— Continued. 



Record num- 
ber. 



22206 

22211 

26107 

27005 

272011 

27306 

27308 

27509 

32206 

32605 

32606 

34205 

34208 

37305 

38505 

38506 

38605 

39405 

39606 

40305 

44505 

45005 

45805 

46107 

50905 

50906 

55005 

55006 

55007 

55206 

55306 

55307 

5551 17 

56106 

57000 

57407 

58207 

58505 

5S806 

59606 

63505 

65307 

66005 

09500 

71905 

72100 

72706 

72707 

76206 

88900 

92408 

92908 

91205 

94207 

91200 

91100 

94605 

94606 

94905 

91900 

95700 

Average. 



Size ol 
head. 



29.2 
28.0 
28.8 
28.9 
28.8 
28.5 
31.7 
30.4 
28.2 
28. 1 
31.3 
30.9 
31.2 
30.9 
29.6 
28.3 
30.5 
31.9 
31.4 
29.8 
30.9 
29.4 
31.0 
31.9 
31.6 
28.5 
30.2 
30.1 
29.5 
30.4 
30.6 
31.1 
31.5 
28.0 
30.5 
31.8 
30.7 
31.1 
31.7 
29.8 
29.7 
31.1 
30.8 
30.1 
29.3 
30.7 
29.5 
28.1 
29.8 
30.3 
29. 6 
31.2 
31.3 
29.9 
31.7 
28.9 
28.0 
29.9 
31.8 
29.8 
29.7 

30.1 



Yield per 
plant 

(grams). 



2.5712 

11.5675 

2. 0390 

16.4120 

19. 1854 

13.3011 

1.5123 

5.3015 

10.4036 

5.2268 

2.0102 

9. 1498 

2.9886 

6. 1394 

12. 1088 

1.0799 

1.2124 

9.3541 

4. 6383 

3. 6003 

5.9990 

3. 2340 

1.5298 

8. 3935 

2.3982 

1.7280 

7.9684 

7. 1852 

2. 1571 

11.3592 

4. 1323 

5. 6804 

9.8228 

12.0161 

10. 1836 

14.9992 

4. 2207 

7.4516 

1.9469 

9. 7084 

4.0230 

7.0051 

7. 6690 

13.5696 

28. 2136 

8. 2929 

14.6802 

4.5806 

5.4411 

9.9034 

3. 7820 

3.2388 

1.2117 

13.7057 

3.0006 

10. 5556 

.7319 

11.8435 

4.4423 

12.3862 

5. 1629 

7.4992 



Yield per 
head 

(grams) . 



0.5142 
.5784 
. 407S 
.5471 
.7106 
.5542 
. 5040 
. 0702 
.5779 
.6533 
.0721 
.6100 
.5977 
.6139 
.6373 
. 5600 
. 6062 
.6681 
.4217 
.6000 
. 5453 
.4042 
.3824 
. 5595 
.3426 
.4320 
.6129 
. 1790 
.5393 
.5978 
.5903 
.5169 
.6139 
.5224 
. 4427 
.6250 
.4221 
. 6210 
.6489 
.5109 
.5747 
.5838 
.6391 
.6168 
.0501 
. 5923 
.7340 
.5726 
.3627 
. 5502 
. 5403 
. 5398 
.4039 
.5711 
.0001 
.5556 
. 3659 
.5383 
.4936 
.5385 
.5736 

.5598 



Weight of 

average 

kernel 

(grams). 



0. 01720 
.02002 
.01416 
.01895 
. 02469 
.01945 
.01777 
.02206 
.02052 
.02323 
.02145 
.01972 
.01916 
.01987 
. 02252 
.OI075 
.01987 
. 02093 
.01341 
.02011 
.01764 
.01376 
.01234 
.01756 
.01085 
.01516 
.02028 
.01593 
.01828 
.01965 
.01931 
.01663 
. 01949 
. 01866 
. 01453 
.01968 
. 01375 
. 02730 
.02049 
.01712 
.01934 
.01878 
.02073 
. 02047 
.02239 
. 01929 
.02484 
. 02036 
.01217 
.01814 
.01827 
.01732 
.01893 
. 01909 
.01895 
. 01923 
. 01307 
. 07544 
.01553 
.01808 
.01934 

.01958 



Height 
(cm.). 



Tillering. 



59 

6 

40 

49 
48 
11 

9 
26 

9 

3 
19 

5 
12 
21 

3 

2 

18 
18 

6 
25 

9 

4 
27 
10 

5 
19 
19 

7 
27 
17 
19 
28 
33 
41 
41 
18 
18 

7 
37 

8 
17 
22 
24 
40, 
15 
27 

8 
30 
21 

7 

7 

6 
31 

7 
22 

7 
23 
11 
24 



RELATION OF SIZE OF HEAD TO YIELD, ETC. 



117 



Table 35. — Relation of size of head to yield, height, and tUlerifig of plant — Continued. 
SIZE OF HEAD, 32 TO 36 KERNELS. 



Record num- 
ber. 


Size of 
head. 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 
head 

(grams). 


Weight of 
average 

kernel 
(grams). 


ffeighl 

(cm.). 


Tillering. 


17307 


34. 5 


3. 1454 


0.7863 


0. 02279 


70 


8 


L890S 


:;i .; 


1.4864 


. 1955 


.01443 


50 


4 


26105 


32. 7 

34.0 


1.8242 
1.8276 


.4560 
.6092 


.01393 

.01792 


69 

55 


13 
8 


26907 


28806 


34.2 


14.4630 


. 7232 


.02111 


75 


30 


3440.-, 


34.5 


1. 1281 


.6883 


01994 


62 


8 


34606 


35.0 


6.1962 


. 7745 


.02213 


61 


13 


36905 


33.4 


5.0200 


.6275 


.01880 


58 


7 


39205 


32.2 


21.5399 


.6731 


.02089 


82 


40 


42405 


33.0 


I. 1892 


.7446 


. 02251 


60 


2 


42905 


33. 5 


1.2499 


. 6249 


.01866 


68 


4 


48506 


32. 7 


9. 4585 


.5564 


.01701 


82 


30 


49505 


33. 5 


1.2716 


.6358 


.01898 


60 


3 


51005 


34.5 


15.5835 


. 6233 


.01S04 


75 


32 


5500S 


33.7 


17.4226 


. 6222 


.01846 


82 


30 


553115 


33.4 


2.5160 


.503'.' 


.01507 


75 


12 


55308 


33. 1 


9.5078 

in. '.MM) 


. 7923 
. 7279 


.02395 
.02184 


79 

89 


28 

23 


55605 


55607 


34.5 


2.3931 


.5983 


.01734 


77 


7 


55608 


33.5 


22.5848 


.9034 


.02(00 


95 


31 


5701)7 


33.6 


3.3176 


.6635 


.0107:, 


90 


9 


5740li 


33.7 


2. 4923 


.6231 


.01846 


92 


14 


57408 


35.0 


12.2004 


.7177 


.02047 


90 


26 


58805 


35.1 


23. 1471 


.7014 


. 01999 


78 


51 


60805 


35.0 


. 5952 


.5052 


.01701 


57 


4 


69305 


34.3 


2.0130 


.6810 


.01984 


70 


. 


72405 


35: 5 


8.4415 


1.4069 


. 03963 


67 


6 


72708 


33.2 


9.03S6 


. 7532 


.02270 


78 


12 


73308 


34.7 


14.2986 


. 7944 


.02291 


74 


23 


85206 


34.2 


4.9315 


. 1 183 


.01312 


69 


13 


88605 


34.5 


1.6362 


.MSI 


.02731 


70 


3 


91305 


34.5 


3.0940 


. 7735 


.02242 


76 


6 


92208 


35.3 


6.6206 


.66,21 


.01876 


78 


1, 


92406 


34.5 


8.2366 


.7488 


.02168 


81 


17 


92409 


35.0 
35.2 


5.7131 
2. 7000 


.6:1 is 
. 5400 


.01814 
.01534 


81 
75 


13 
6 


92905 


92909 


33.1 


10. 1363 


.6335 


.01916 


86 


21 


95509 

Average. 


34.5 


2.9475 


. 7369 


.02136 


74 


4 


34.1 


7.2530 


.6868 


.02023 


73.9 


15.4 



SIZE OF HEAD, 36 KERNELS AND OVER. 



18906 


65.0 


0.9229 


0.0220 


0.01420 


67 


5 


21813 


43.2 


4.025s 


.8051 


.01877 


80 


21 


34206 


40.5 


1.5940 


.7970 


.01968 


74 


5 


37707 


38.6 


3.3004 


.6601 


.01710 


64 


5 


40205 


38.8 


3. 6302 


.7260 


.01871 


65 


11 


40505 


42.5 


4. 1546 


1.0386 


. 02444 


60 


4 


43405 


41.3 


2.8000 


.9333 


. 02258 


64 


3 


46105 


37.1 


4.6146 


.6502 


.01775 


73 


8 


48705 


44.0 


1.3615 


.7260 


. 01652 


80 


7 


48706 


47.4 


6. 1986 


.7748 


. 01635 


78 


12 


55508 


36.0 


3.7407 


.6222 


.01732 


73 


12 


57405 


41.0 


.8328 


. 8328 


.02031 


73 


1 


57805 


38.6 


1.89ns 


.6998 


.01814 


76 


17- 


57905 


36.8 


2.4731 


.4122 


.01118 


74 


17 


58705 


58.7 


2.5436 


.6359 


.01082 


68 


11 


58905 


42. 5 


2.3031 


.5758 


.01355 


66 


13 


59605 


38. 2 


7. 1828 


.7183 


.01880 


77 


30 


62805 


37.0 


1.3451 


.4484 


.01212 


70 


14 


66006 


52. 3 


6.0090 


.8584 


.01642 


73 


12 


72806 


36.7 


2.0970 


.6900 


. 01906 


62 


5 


73306 


37.6 




.7761 


. 02062 


78 


20 


81505 


48.7 


2. 8327 


.9442 


. 01940 


78 


7 


84905 


37.0 


.7130 


.7130 


.01927 


47 


4 


92906 


36. 2 


2.8816 


. 5763 


.01592 


75 


7 


95505 

Average. 


37.0 


.3146 


.3146 


.00850 


79 


3 


42.1 


3. 3723 


.7148 


.01710 


71.0 


in 2 



118 



IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 



Table 36. — Summary of relation of size of head to yield, height, and tillering of plant. 



Classification according to 
number of kernels on 
head. 



Below 16 

16 to 20 

20 to 24 

21 to 28 

28 to 32 

32 to 36 - 

More than 36 



Number 


number 


of plants, of kernels 




on spike. 


18 


13.3 


36 


18.4 


80 


22.2 


84 


2.5. (1 


73 


30.1 


38 


34.1 


. 25 


42.1 



Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Yield per 

head 
(gram). 


Weight of 
average 
kernel 
(gram) 


Height 
(cm. ) . 


1.3169 


0. 2654 


0. 02059 


55.2 


3. 7758 


.3383 


. 01862 


ii4. 1 


6. 8466 


. 43.5.5 


. 01953 


73.8 


7. .5207 


. 4848 


.01874 


73.8 


7. 4992 


.55! is 


.01958 


74.5 


7. 2.530 


.6868 


. 02023 


73.9 


3.3723 


.7148 


.01710 


71.0 



Tillering. 



6.9 
13.7 
21.4 
21.2 
L9.4 
15.4 
10.2 



Table 37. — Relation of yield of plant to height and tillering, and to the yield per head. 



Classification according to yield per plant, in 
- grams. 


Number 
of plants 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Height 
(cm. ) . 


Tillering 


Yield per 

head 
(gram). 




31 
67 
87 
93 
51 
20 
5 


0. 6050 
1. 7673 
3. 5.526 
7. 6485 
12. 2862 
17.1908 
23. 2829 


56.5 
62.2 
69.1 
7.5.4 
84.4 
84.6 
85.2 


3.7 
7.0 
11.6 
22.1 
32.3 
42.9 
43.2 


0. 3553 


1 to 2 5 


.4740 


2 5 to 5 


.4917 


5 to 10 


. 5320 


10 to 15 


.5592 


15 to 20 


..5310 




.6865 







Table 38.- -Relation of yield per head to yield, height, and tillering of plant, and to weight of 

average kernel. 



Classification according to yield 
per head, in grams. 


Number 
of plants. 


Yield per 

head 
(gram). 


Yield per 

plant 
(grams). 


Height 
(cm.). 


Tillering 


Weight of 

average 
kernel 
(gram). 


Below 300 


30 
62 
98 
78 
50 
2.5 
12 


0. 2484 
.3567 
. 4.524 
..5177 
. 6372 
.7456 
.9229 


1.6939 

3. 7365 
6.7326 

9. 5646 
7.6214 

4. 4523 
5. 7687 


60. S 
65.6 
72.8 
76.6 
74.3 
75.2 
73.7 


11.4 
15. .5 
19.9 
21.8 
17.3 
18.6 
10.3 


0.01586 


300 to 400 


.01737 


400 to 500 


.01847 


500 to 600 


. 02073 


600 to 700 


. 02056 


700 to 800 


.02179 


More than 800 


.02151 







SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. 

As between wheat kernels of the same variety raised under similar 
conditions, those kernels having a high percentage of proteid mate- 
rial have a lower specific gravity, weigh slightly less, and occupy a 
smaller volume than kernels having a smaller percentage of proteids. 

As between individual spikes and individual plants, the same rela- 
tions obtain. 

As between individual plants in different years, these relations do 
not hold. 

The quality of high proteid content and its correlated properties 
may be due to immaturity in the kernel, or they may belong to the 
normal and fully ripened kernel. 

As between kernels, spikes, and plants, those kernels of greater 
weight contain a larger weight of proteids — this in spite of the fact 
that they contain a lower percentage. 



SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. 119 

Plants bearing the largest number of kernels have kernels of more 
than medium but not the greatest weight, as do also plants producing 
the greatest weight of kernels. The same is true of plants producing 
the greatest weight of proteid matter and gluten. 

Heavy seed wheat drilled at the rate of 1^ bushels per acre pro- 
duced a much larger crop of seed the first year of the separation than 
did light seed drilled at the same rate, but by continuing the separa- 
tion of the respective crops and selecting heavy seed from the crop 
grown from heavy seed, and light seed from the crop grown from 
light seed, the difference in yield in three or four years was small. 

After the first year of separation the light seed produced a greater 
amount of proteids per acre than did the heavy seed. 

A determination of the total or of the proteid nitrogen content in 
the kernels on one row of spikelets of wheat affords a fairly close esti- 
mate of the same constituents in the kernels on the other row of 
spikelets. 

A determination of the total or of the proteid nitrogen content in 
the kernels on one-half of the spikes on a wheat plant will give a very 
good estimate of the same constituents in the kernels on the other 
spikes, provided there are at least an average number of spikes on the 
plant. 

There may be quite a large variation in the proteid nitrogen con- 
tent of different spikes on the same wheat plant. 

Determinations of the proteid nitrogen content of 800 spikes of 
wheat of the same variety representing different plants showed a 
variation of from 1.12 to 4.95 per cent of proteid nitrogen, and 351 
plants of the same variety the following year varied from 1.20 to 5.85 
per cent. 

The proportion of gluten to proteids in kernels of different wheat 
plants may vary considerably. A determination of proteid nitrogen 
is therefore not always a guide to the gluten content of the wheat. 
Selection for improvement should be based on the determination of 
gluten. 

Wheat plants having kernels high in gluten contain a smaller pro- 
portion of other proteids than do plants of medium or low gluten 
content. 

In wheat of the same variety, raised in the same field in the same 
year, the ratio of gliadin to glutenin was practically the same in 
plants of low, medium, and high proteid nitrogen content. 

It may therefore be assumed that an increase in the gluten con- 
tent of a given variety of wheat raised in the same region would carry 
with it a corresponding improvement in its value for bread making, 
although there might be fluctuations from year to year in the quality 
of the gluten. 



120 IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF WHEAT. 

The content of proteid nitrogen, the kernel weight, and the total 
proteid nitrogen production by the wheat plant are hereditary quali- 
i ies. 

There is a tendency for plants possessing any of these qualities in 
an extreme degree to produce progeny in which the same qualities 
approach more closely to the average, but certain exceptional plants 
may transmit the same or more extreme qualities. 

The yield of grain per plant after a severe winter was decreased in 
proportion to the susceptibility of the plant to cold. The effect of 
the cold caused the plant to produce a less number of heads, or, in 
other woids, to tiller less. 

The early-maturing plants yielded the most grain, and those ripen- 
ing later produced in each ease less when grouped into ripening 
periods of four days, extending through more than three weeks' time. 

The early-maturing plants produced grain of slightly lower nitro- 
gen content than the later maturing plants, and the number of grams 
of proteid nitrogen in the average kernel was likewise less in the 
early-maturing plants. 

Plants with heads of slightly more than medium size produced 
the largest yields of grain, and were taller than plants whh either 
larger or smaller heads. Plants with heads of medium size, or slightly 
less, tillered most extensively. 

The weight of the average kernel did not increase with the size of 
the head, nor did it decrease, except on the very largest heads. 

The largest yielding plants were the tallest and tillered most. 



O 



IE Mr '08 



